play_station

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it opens the top result in Safari (a side effect) and that it may randomly pick a seed from a specific path. This is good transparency for a non-destructive tool.

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?

Three sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action, then additional details. Very concise and well-structured.

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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what it does, where it opens, and the fallback mechanism. Missing edge cases (e.g., no stations note) but not critical.

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 schema already describes the parameter as optional and its fallback. The description adds value by explaining that the fallback picks a random entry from the Obsidian stations note, which goes beyond the schema's 'falls back to stations note'.

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?

The description clearly states the action: starting a YouTube station from an artist or genre seed. It specifies the resource (YouTube station) and distinguishes from siblings like play_album by mentioning it opens the top result in Safari.

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?

The description explains that the seed is optional and the fallback uses a random entry from a stations note, giving context on when to omit the parameter. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus other siblings, though the behavior is clear enough.

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