search_tidal

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses return format (dictionary with grouped results and top_hit) and gives processing instructions. Does not explicitly state idempotency or safety, but as a search tool it is assumed read-only.

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?

Description is structured with clear sections (purpose, when to use, processing instructions, args, returns) and front-loaded. It is somewhat long but necessary given the lack of annotations and schema descriptions; every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema, so description compensates by explaining return format and processing steps. Covers search across multiple content types with parameter details. Could mention pagination behavior, but limit parameter suffices. Overall complete for a search tool.

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%, but the description thoroughly explains each parameter: query with examples, search_type with explicit options ('track', 'album', 'artist', 'playlist', 'all'), and limit with default (50) and max (300). This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'Search TIDAL's catalog for tracks, albums, artists, and playlists.' It provides specific example user requests and distinguishes from sibling tools like batch_search_tidal, which handles multiple queries.

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?

Explicitly lists when to use the tool with concrete user requests ('USE THIS TOOL WHENEVER A USER ASKS FOR:'). Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the sibling context and the examples make usage clear.

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