create_scrobble_start

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds a behavioral cue by instructing the agent to read the matching GET or /schema endpoint first, which is useful for an open-world payload. It does not contradict annotations, but it does not disclose side effects or response behavior beyond that.

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 brief, direct, and front-loaded with the primary purpose before the endpoint and argument notes. It earns each line, though it could have added one sentence for alternatives or usage context without bloating.

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?

Given the output schema and annotations, the description does not need to explain return values or safety. However, it leaves out important invocation context: authentication requirements, when to use start vs pause/stop, and what constitutes a valid scrobble start payload. The pointer to /schema helps but is a deferral rather than complete context.

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?

The schema provides only an opaque 'body' object with 0% property coverage. The description compensates by labeling it 'Request payload' and explicitly directing the agent to the matching GET or /schema endpoint for the expected fields. This is genuinely helpful for an open-ended body parameter, though no concrete field names are given.

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 specific action ('Start watching') and resource ('in a media center'), backed by the explicit POST /scrobble/start endpoint. It is clear enough as an operation, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from create_scrobble_pause, create_scrobble_stop, or create_checkin.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus related scrobble/checkin operations. It does not mention alternatives, prerequisites, or the scrobble lifecycle. The agent must infer context from sibling tool names.

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