get_library_streams_by_stream_id_loudness

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no meaningful behavioral context beyond restating 'GET' and 'loudness' — it does not mention response behavior, sampling semantics at the tool level, or any side effects. The 'subsample' behavior is stated but belongs to parameter semantics.

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 action, followed by the endpoint and an Args list. There is no filler or repetition, and every line serves a purpose, though the content is thin.

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, the return shape does not need to be described. The tool has only two parameters, one required and one optional with a default, and the description covers both. However, it omits any broader context such as what 'loudness' represents, when to use it, or what the subsample values mean semantically, leaving the agent to infer too much.

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 provides minimal but real explanations: 'stream_id: The id of the stream' and 'subsample: Subsample result down to return only the provided number of samples.' This is adequate for basic invocation but lacks detail such as where to obtain stream_id or what 'samples' means in context.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get loudness about a stream,' and the endpoint path reinforces the target as /library/streams/{streamId}/loudness. It is not a tautology and is likely distinguishable from siblings like get_library_streams_by_stream_id_ext or _levels by the 'loudness' concept, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not say when to use this tool versus the many sibling stream endpoints, nor does it mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools. The intended context must be inferred entirely from the tool name and endpoint.

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