skipToNext

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this requires premium subscription, what happens if no next track exists (e.g., stops playback), error conditions, or rate limits. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every element ('skip to the next track', 'current Spotify playback queue') directly contributes to understanding, making it optimally concise.

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 tool's moderate complexity (a playback control mutation), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic action but misses critical context like authentication requirements, error behavior, and what happens after skipping (e.g., playback continues).

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 100%, so the schema fully documents the optional 'deviceId' parameter. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score of 3 where structured data handles parameter documentation.

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 specific action ('skip to the next track') and resource ('current Spotify playback queue'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'skipToPrevious' (backward navigation) and 'pausePlayback'/'resumePlayback' (playback state control). It precisely communicates the tool's function without ambiguity.

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 usage context ('current Spotify playback queue'), suggesting it should be used when playback is active and there's a next track available. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it (e.g., if no device is active) or name alternatives like 'skipToPrevious' for backward navigation, leaving some guidance gaps.

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