Show Spotify results

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context about display-readiness and the need to filter results for the user, going beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 word earns its place. No redundant or explanatory fluff.

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 presence of an output schema and self-explanatory annotations, the description covers the essential workflow (call data tools first, pass filtered results). It doesn't detail item construction or edge cases, but for a simple rendering tool with a rich input schema, it is sufficiently complete.

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 does not explain the parameters at all, and schema description coverage is 0%. While the schema's property names and the nested card description provide some hints, the tool description fails to clarify how to populate 'title' or 'items' or what constitutes a valid display-ready result.

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 tool renders a display-ready list of Spotify entities, using the specific verb 'render' and resource 'display-ready list'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that fetch, search, or modify Spotify data, making its purpose 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 description gives explicit sequencing guidance ('Call data tools first') and a clear instruction on what to pass ('only the results the user should see'). It implies this is the final step in a workflow, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions.

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