Get Liked Songs

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds return structure details (SavedTracks with items and added_at timestamp, pagination via limit/offset), which is valuable context beyond the annotations.

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 concise: one opening line, Args section for two parameters, Returns section. No wasted words, well-structured and front-loaded.

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 low complexity, simple schema with two optional params, rich annotations, and existing output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: function, parameters, return shape, and pagination. No gaps.

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%, so the description fully compensates. It explains limit as 'Max tracks to return per page (1-50, default 20)' and offset as 'Number of tracks to skip for pagination (default 0)', adding constraints and semantics not in the schema.

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 'Get user's saved/liked tracks (Liked Songs library)', using a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'saved/liked tracks'. The title 'Get Liked Songs' further clarifies. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_playlist_tracks or get_track_info.

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 implies usage for retrieving saved tracks but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. No guidance on conflicts with siblings like add_tracks_to_playlist or search_tracks.

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