my_playlists

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden and covers little: it does not say whether login/cookies are required, whether results are paginated or capped, or what the diagnostics field is for. The return-value sketch is the main behavioral contribution, but an output schema already exists, so that content is largely redundant.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short lines, front-loaded with the action and then the platform selector and return shape. The compact returns notation is dense but readable; nothing is padded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Output schema presence means return values need not be explained, so the remaining gaps are auth prerequisite and scoping behavior for a read of the user's own data. Adequate to invoke, but missing the context that would let an agent decide when this tool is the right choice.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The single optional parameter is enumerated in the schema via $ref, and the description restates the allowed values inline (qq_music | netease | kugou), confirming the selection semantics at a glance. It does not state the default (qq_music) or what happens on an unsupported value, but the enum plus inline listing leaves little ambiguity.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"List my created playlists on a platform" gives a specific verb (list), resource (playlists), and ownership scope (my created), which separates it from siblings like liked_songs or playlist_songs. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with those siblings, but the resource and scope are unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention that this is user-scoped and presumably requires an authenticated session. An agent must guess whether this tool belongs anywhere around the many create_* and playlist_songs siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.