search_music

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the return format ('List of search results with username, filename, size, etc.') but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention potential limitations, rate limits, or error behavior. The read-only nature is evident from the verb 'search', but not explicitly disclosed.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, followed by an Args section and Returns section. Every sentence provides necessary information with no redundancy or verbosity.

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 simple search tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return format. It lacks some edge-case details (e.g., behavior when no results found, sorting order), but overall it is sufficiently complete for the tool's simplicity.

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%, but the description compensates fully by explaining both parameters: 'query: Search text (artist, track, album)' and 'limit: Max results to return (default 20)'. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's bare type definitions and default.

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: 'Search for music files on Soulseek.' This is a specific verb ('search') and resource ('music files on Soulseek'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like download_music and browse_user.

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 does not provide any explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or relationships with sibling tools like search_last_results or download_music. The usage context is only implied by the purpose.

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