setlistfm_get_setlist

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety and mutability are covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as the authentication role of api_key, rate limits, or error behavior for missing IDs.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It communicates the core action and scoping constraint efficiently.

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 get-by-ID tool with no output schema and an undocumented api_key parameter, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain authentication, what a setlist ID looks like, or what the agent can expect to receive.

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 the description must compensate for the two undocumented parameters. It implies that setlistId is the ID to look up, but says nothing about the api_key parameter or the expected format of the setlist ID.

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 states a specific verb and resource: get a setlist from Setlist.fm. The phrase 'by ID' distinguishes it from search-oriented siblings like setlistfm_search_setlists, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'by ID': an agent can infer this tool is for when a setlist ID is already known. There is no explicit guidance on when to use it instead of setlistfm_search_setlists or setlistfm_artist_setlists, and no prerequisites are stated.

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