search_music

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context that the search hits an external P2P network via a local slskd instance and is restricted to authorized content. However, it does not disclose whether the search is blocking, what the results contain, or any rate/usage limits.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and the authorization restriction earns its place as meaningful 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?

For a network-search tool with no output schema and no annotations, this is under-specified. It omits parameter semantics, result-return behavior, and any connection to the sibling download/list workflow. The authorization note is helpful but does not make the definition complete enough for correct invocation.

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 must compensate. 'Search Soulseek' weakly implies what query means, but limit and especially wait_ms are entirely unexplained. An agent cannot confidently know how long to wait or how many results to expect from the description alone.

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?

States a specific verb 'Search' and a specific resource 'Soulseek through the user's local slskd instance,' and limits scope to music. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools queue_download and list_downloads, which handle different stages of the workflow.

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 gives an authorization constraint ('Use only for music the user is authorized to obtain') but does not explicitly say when to prefer this over queue_download or list_downloads. The intended usage is only implied by the word 'Search' and the music scope.

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