Get public song queue

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuine behavioral trait — that video details are stripped from the response — but says nothing about auth requirements for a supposedly public endpoint, pagination, or ordering.

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?

A single sentence with the resource front-loaded and the differentiator trailing. No filler, nothing repeated from the title beyond what is needed.

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 read-only, zero-required-parameter tool with full schema coverage, the definition is nearly sufficient; the exclusion of video details is a useful disclosure. It could still say what the queue does contain (titles, requesters, order) since there is no output schema to fall back on.

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 100% and the single optional channel parameter is fully documented there (format, defaults, token fallback). The description adds no parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("Get the media request queue") and adds a scoping qualifier ("for public display, without video details") that separates it from the private queue variants. It stops short of naming the sibling songrequests_queue explicitly, so the agent must infer the distinction from "public".

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?

"For public display" implies the use case (public-facing overlays/pages where video details must not leak) but never states when to choose this over songrequests_queue, songrequests_pending, or songrequests_playing. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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