get_library_streams_by_stream_id_levels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with those. It adds only minor behavior context such as JSON output and subsample behavior, but does not disclose auth requirements, response size implications, or other operational traits.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and avoids unnecessary filler. The endpoint line is slightly redundant with the tool name but still useful for resolving exact call semantics, and the Args section is compact.

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?

With an output schema present and helpful annotations, the description covers the essential call details and both parameters. However, it leaves some ambiguity about what exactly 'levels' means and never clarifies the relationship or difference between this endpoint and the similarly named 'loudness' sibling.

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 both parameters: `stream_id` identifies the stream, and `subsample` limits the number of samples returned. The subsample explanation is notably more informative than the schema's bare title.

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 the tool retrieves loudness data about a stream and returns it as JSON. It identifies the resource and endpoint, but it does not differentiate itself from the similarly named sibling that already exists, so it falls short of a 5.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool instead of alternatives. Given the sibling list includes `get_library_streams_by_stream_id_loudness` and other similar stream endpoints, the agent is left to infer the correct choice with no explicit exclusions or context.

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