songsterr_search_songs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds the return format (JSON array of objects) and chaining behavior. It does not add negative or contradictory behavioral traits.

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?

The description is two sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and immediately provides output format and a chaining hint, making it efficient for an agent.

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?

Given the simple tool (1 parameter, 1 required, output schema present), the description covers the core functionality and output. It does not cover error cases or pagination, but for a search tool, this is adequate.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% according to context, so the description must compensate. It mentions that search is by title/artist pattern and provides an example in the schema, but does not elaborate on the limit parameter or how the pattern is matched. The description adds the output format but lacks parameter details.

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 verb 'search', resource 'songs', and the criteria 'by title/artist pattern'. It distinguishes from siblings by hinting that the output id is used for songsterr_get_tab, and the other siblings (list_tunings, transpose) serve different purposes.

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 indicates that after searching, the id should be passed to songsterr_get_tab, implying a workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or provide alternatives, but the context from sibling names makes usage clear.

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