List artificial-streaming records

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true; the description confirms it's a list operation and adds cursor-pagination detail. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful behavioral context beyond what annotations alone convey.

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 that front-loads the core action (list records) and key details (cursor-paginated, purpose) without extraneous words. Every part earns its place.

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 list tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose and filter options. It lacks explicit mention of return fields, but the core functionality is clear.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 7 parameters. The description adds grouping of filters and mentions pagination, but the schema already defines each parameter meaningfully. The description provides minimal additional semantic value.

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 it lists artificial-streaming records with cursor-pagination, and lists specific filters (dsp, date range, release_id, isrc). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_releases or get_artificial_fee_breakdown.

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 implies usage for viewing artificial-streaming records but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus related siblings like get_artificial_fee_breakdown or list_stream_radar_flags. No comparable alternatives are mentioned.

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