search_soundcloud

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: browser backend, dependency, headless browser per call, performance trade-offs, no auth required, and empty-list behavior. This exceeds expected transparency.

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 concise and well-structured: first sentence states purpose and output, second sentence explains technical trade-offs. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or verbosity.

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 tool's modest complexity (2 params, no annotations, output schema exists), the description comprehensively covers return format, error case (empty list), dependencies, and performance caveats. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for both query and max_results, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides; it focuses on output and operational context.

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 states the specific action (search SoundCloud for tracks), the resource (SoundCloud), and the output format (list of track dicts with keys and types). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search tools like search_youtube or search_images.

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 contextual guidance by noting it is slower and heavier than HTTP-based tools and requires the pyscrappy[browser] extra. This implies when to use it (when SoundCloud-specific data is needed) but does not name explicit alternatives or exclusions.

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