spotify_dj_plan

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

The description discloses immutability, determinism, and no Spotify changes, which adds context beyond the annotations. The idempotentHint and destructiveHint are consistent, and readOnlyHint=false is not directly contradicted as the tool may modify internal state without touching Spotify.

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: 'Create an immutable deterministic DJ order without changing Spotify.' Every word contributes meaning, with no redundant filler or unnecessary detail.

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?

The description lacks parameter semantics and clarity on what analysis_id, energy_curve, and artist_spacing do. It also does not explain how this tool fits with related DJ planning tools, leaving the agent underinformed for correct invocation despite having an output schema.

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 description provides zero information about the three parameters (analysis_id, energy_curve, artist_spacing). With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate but does not, leaving the agent to guess parameter meanings and usage.

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 it creates an immutable deterministic DJ order without changing Spotify. The verb 'create' and the resource 'DJ order' are specific, and the scope 'without changing Spotify' differentiates it from sibling tools like spotify_dj_apply.

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 use for planning without Spotify side effects, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like spotify_dj_apply or spotify_dj_analyze, nor does it provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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