Search Spotify

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds value by detailing the return format (SearchResults with items and pagination) and search syntax behavior, complementing the annotations without contradiction.

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 structured as a docstring with clear sections (Args, Returns, Note). It is fairly detailed but not overly verbose; each sentence contributes to understanding or usage guidance.

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 tool's complexity (9 parameters, 15 siblings, existing output schema), the description covers purpose, all parameters, return format, and usage notes. It lacks error handling or rate limit info, but annotations and output schema partially cover 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by listing all 9 parameters with concise explanations and an example showing their combination. This enables correct invocation without relying on 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 explicitly states 'Search Spotify for tracks, albums, artists, or playlists', with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that target specific entities (e.g., get_album_info), making its purpose 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?

The description includes a note about Spotify's search syntax and an example, implying its use for general discovery. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative references, but the context of siblings with specific ID-based queries provides indirect guidance.

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