search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It lists parameters but does not disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or what happens on empty results. It also does not describe the output format beyond what the schema implies.

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 paragraph with bullet-like arg breakdown. It is reasonably concise for the number of parameters, but could be more structured with separate sections for usage notes.

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 an output schema (not shown), the description does not mention what the tool returns, pagination details, or common use cases. Given 5 parameters and no annotations, the description should provide more guidance on market filtering, default behavior, and result structure.

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 description must compensate. The description adds context like filter syntax and type list, which the schema lacks. However, it mostly restates schema properties (query, types, limit, offset, market) with minimal added meaning.

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 searches for various Spotify entities (tracks, albums, artists, etc.), using a specific verb 'Search'. It distinguishes from sibling tools that are for specific actions like getting a single item or modifying playlists.

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 lists arguments but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for finding content, but lacks 'when not to use' or comparisons with other search-like tools (none exist).

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