get_collection

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden, but it only says 'List releases' and gives no detail on authentication, pagination, response format, or special folder semantics such as folderId=0 meaning all folders. It conveys read-only behavior implicitly but leaves too much unstated.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning and it is appropriately concise for the amount of information it actually covers.

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 tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is incomplete. An agent cannot determine whether username is effectively required, what folderId 0 represents, how pagination behaves, or what the response contains. It identifies the topic but not enough operational detail for confident 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 needs to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. It loosely maps 'user's' to username and 'folder' to folderId, but it does not address page, perPage, or the meaning of their defaults. The agent must rely entirely on the raw schema property names.

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 a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('releases in a Discogs user's collection folder'). It is unambiguous enough to communicate the core purpose, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_collection_folders or find_collection_release.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of siblings such as get_collection_folders or find_collection_release. The description does not mention prerequisites like username being effectively required, nor does it explain what makes this endpoint the right choice for a given task.

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