Search and play song

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions playing and returning context, but omits side effects (e.g., replacing current playback, queue behavior), error handling, and dependency on external players. This leaves significant gaps for an action that mutates playback state.

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?

Two sentences: the first concisely captures purpose and output, the second adds a specific detail about the style parameter. No redundancy, every sentence 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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers key actions but lacks details on return format, error handling, prerequisites, and integration with sibling tools like 'pause', 'resume'. Some context is indirectly provided by sibling names, but the description could be more self-contained.

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 75%, and the description adds value by explaining the 'style' field behavior ('filled from NetEase song wiki when available'), which is not in the schema. Other parameters are adequately described in the schema, so the description provides marginal but useful improvement.

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 searches for a song, plays the best match using neteasecli/mpv, and returns song info plus listening context. It distinguishes from sibling 'search_song' (search only) and 'play_track' (play specific track) by combining both actions.

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 the tool is for searching and playing a song in one step, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like 'search_song' or 'play_track', nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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