Remove Spotify Playlist Items

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

Given the annotations already declare destructive and non-read-only behavior, the description adds valuable context: it specifies that removal is exact (IDs or URIs), explains how snapshot_id locks to a specific version, and warns that a missing returned snapshot is 'explicitly ambiguous'. These details go beyond the structured annotations and help the agent interpret responses correctly.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds meaningful detail. There is no fluff or repetition of the title or schema.

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 destructive mutation tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral nuances (exact matching, snapshot versioning, ambiguity) without needing to explain return values. It does not mention permissions or side effects, but the annotations cover the destructive nature. Overall, it provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining item_ids_or_uris as 'track IDs or track/episode URIs' and snapshot_id as a version target. The playlist_id parameter is not explicitly described but is obvious from the tool name and title. This coverage is sufficient for the two non-obvious parameters, though it could have also mentioned the 100-item array limit.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Remove exact Spotify track IDs or track/episode URIs', which clearly indicates the action and target. The tool name and title reinforce that this removes items from a playlist, distinguishing it from siblings like spotify_playlist_reorder and spotify_library_remove.

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 mentions using snapshot_id to target an exact playlist version, providing a concrete usage instruction. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or include exclusion criteria. The intended use is clear from the title and name, but no explicit alternatives are given.

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