find_playlist

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares the safety profile, so the description's added value is the return payload ('Returns id and uri'), which matters because there is no output schema. It does not cover result limits or behavior when no playlist matches, but for a read-only lookup this is solid disclosure.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; purpose, input requirement, and return shape each get one clause. 'Needs query' is mildly redundant with the schema's required list but costs almost nothing.

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 single-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description supplies the essentials: what it searches, that it requires input, and what it returns. Only matching behavior and the empty-result case are unaddressed.

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 100%, and the schema's own description ('Playlist name; spelling may be rough') is actually richer than the description's 'Needs query'. The description restates that the parameter is required rather than adding syntax or matching semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: finding the user's own playlists by name. It is clear on its own, but it never distinguishes itself from siblings like get_playlists (list all) or search, which an agent could easily pick instead.

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 name-based scope implies when to reach for it (you have a rough playlist name), and 'Needs query' signals the required input. However, no sibling alternative is named and no when-not condition is given, so the agent must infer the choice between this, get_playlists, and search.

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