skipToPrevious

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the core action but does not mention important behavioral traits such as requiring active playback or behavior at the start of the queue. However, the action is simple and non-destructive, so minimal transparency is still adequate.

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 unnecessary words. It conveys purpose and context 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one optional param, no output schema), the description and schema together cover the essentials. It does not detail edge cases, but for a basic playback control this is a minor gap.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage for the only parameter (deviceId) with a description: 'The Spotify device ID (auto-selected if omitted)'. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('skip to previous track') and resource ('current Spotify playback queue'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like skipToNext. It is unambiguous and accurately describes the tool's function.

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 clear context by specifying the current Spotify playback queue, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., skipToNext for the next track) or exclusions. It is clear enough for most use cases without being overly prescriptive.

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