Get album audio resolution

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that the payload is bit-depth/sample-rate pairs, which is modest extra context, but says nothing about the individual_tracks flag's effect or whether all tracks are covered.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, which is appropriately sized. It is arguably too terse given the undocumented parameter, but it is structurally clean.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described in prose. However, with a fully undocumented optional parameter and no usage context, the definition is only minimally sufficient for correct invocation.

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% and neither parameter is explained in the description. The required album_id is obvious by name, but the optional 'individual_tracks' boolean is completely opaque — the description gives no hint whether it changes the returned shape to per-track resolutions.

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?

States a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('bit-depth and sample-rate pairs for an album'), which is unambiguous. It implicitly distinguishes itself from the near-identical sibling tidal_get_track_audio_resolution via the album scope, but never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tidal_get_track_audio_resolution, nor any mention of prerequisites (e.g. auth or that album_id must be valid). The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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