search_artists

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations: results are best-match ordered, pagination is supported, limit has a default of 30 and a maximum of 1000. This gives the agent practical expectations for the 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?

The description is short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The Args block is compact and directly maps to the three parameters, with no filler or repeated content. Every sentence earns its place.

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 search tool with three parameters, an output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, ordering, pagination, and parameter constraints. Nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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 carries the full burden for parameter meaning. It fully compensates by explaining artist, limit, and page, including defaults for limit and page and the maximum limit. This is more informative than the schema alone, which only provides titles and types.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search artists by name, best match first.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search tools like search_albums and search_tracks, and from artist lookup tools such as get_artist. The purpose is 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 implies the tool should be used when a caller has an artist name and wants ranked results, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as get_artist, get_similar_artists, or get_chart_top_artists. There is no when-not guidance or named alternative, leaving some routing to inference.

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