get_saved_tracks

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

With no annotations, the description bears full transparency burden. It discloses that the tool returns tracks sorted by most recently saved and supports pagination with a max limit of 50. However, it does not describe the return structure of tracks (e.g., fields) or mention authentication requirements, which are important for a read operation.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place. First sentence states purpose, second adds sorting and pagination details, third provides use-case context. No redundancy or 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?

For a simple list tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, sorting, and pagination. It could be enhanced by noting authentication requirements or common error conditions, and by contrasting with sibling tools like search_tracks.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that 'limit' has a max of 50 and 'offset' is for pagination, adding meaning beyond the schema's defaults. However, it does not explicitly describe offset's behavior (e.g., starting point) or the default values (20 and 0).

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 'Get the current user's saved (liked) tracks' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_tracks or get_playlist_tracks by specifying 'saved tracks' and 'user's library'.

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 usage for retrieving liked tracks and mentions it is a 'rich signal for playlist building', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_tracks or get_my_playlists. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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