Get Spotify Podcast Show

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which already cover the safety profile. The description adds that the tool returns 'typed details' and a 'canonical Spotify link', which is useful but does not go beyond annotations into side effects, errors, or rate limits. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes all necessary semantic details. No extraneous words or repetition of schema information.

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 tool is simple (one parameter, read-only, idempotent) and an output schema exists, so the description need not detail return fields. It provides the key constraint (exact ID) and result shape. Could be slightly more complete by mentioning possible failure modes, but is generally sufficient.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that show_id must be an exact ID (not a name) and refers to a show, which adds meaning beyond the raw schema. However, the parameter is self-explanatory from its name, and the description provides minimal extra detail.

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 a specific action ('Return typed details and a canonical Spotify link') on a specific resource ('one exact show ID'), which distinguishes it from siblings like spotify_podcast_show_episodes and spotify_podcast_discover. The verb and object are precise and unambiguous.

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 phrase 'one exact show ID' implicitly tells the agent this tool requires a known ID and is not for searching or discovery. While no explicit alternatives are named, the context from sibling names and the description gives clear usage context without exclusions.

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