radio_by_tag

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. However, it only says 'Get radio stations,' which implies a read operation but does not mention potential rate limits, pagination, error handling, or whether the result set is ordered. The lack of detail leaves the agent with significant uncertainty.

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 sentence, making it concise. However, it lacks structure such as front-loading key information or using bullet points. While not verbose, it could benefit from additional context in a structured format.

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 the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about the expected input values and output format. It does not explain what a 'genre tag' refers to (e.g., exact values or examples) or mention default behavior for the optional 'limit' parameter. The completeness is low for a tool with 2 parameters.

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%: the description adds no meaning to the parameters beyond their names and types in the schema. For example, it does not clarify what constitutes a valid 'tag' or what the 'limit' defaults to. The agent must rely solely on schema types, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 'Get radio stations by genre tag,' specifying the action (get) and the filter criterion (genre tag). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like radio_by_country, radio_search, radio_top_clicked, and radio_top_voted, which have different filtering or ordering criteria.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It neither mentions when not to use it nor compares it to siblings like radio_search or radio_by_country. The agent must infer from the tool name and description alone.

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