update-playlist

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It discloses the non-obvious 'full-replace' behavior, the read-before-write mechanism that prevents field blanking, and the quota cost of 50 units. These are valuable behavioral insights beyond what the schema or annotations would provide.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the action, and every phrase earns its place. The second sentence packs crucial behavioral and cost information without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Despite having no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects for correct invocation: purpose, partial-update behavior with the read-first mechanism, and cost. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool appropriately.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, explicitly noting each optional parameter is 'unchanged if omitted.' The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema—it mentions the three updatable fields but does not enrich their semantics further. Thus, the schema does the heavy lifting, and the description earns the baseline score.

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 the tool's function: 'Rename, re-describe, or change the privacy of a playlist.' This is a specific verb+resource combination and distinguishes it from sibling tools like update-playlist-item, which operates on playlist items rather than playlist metadata.

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?

Provides clear context for use (updating title, description, or privacy) and explains a key behavior: 'reads the current playlist first so omitted fields aren't blanked,' which guides partial updates. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of the highest standard.

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