Get TIDAL lyrics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two useful behavioral facts beyond that: lyrics are 'available' (i.e., may be absent) and synchronized subtitles are returned alongside plain lyrics. It does not describe the response shape, which is acceptable given an output schema exists.

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?

One tight sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the verb and the key qualifier 'available'. It is appropriately sized for a single-purpose lookup tool, though it is arguably too terse to be maximally useful.

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 description need not explain return values, and annotations cover safety. However, for a lookup keyed on an undocumented identifier, it should at least note that lyrics may be unavailable or what ID format is expected, leaving a modest gap.

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% for the single track_id parameter, so the description must carry the burden; 'one track' confirms the parameter identifies a track but adds no format detail (e.g., TIDAL track ID vs ISRC). This is the bare minimum, marginally above a pure restatement.

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 verb and resource ('Return available lyrics and synchronized subtitles') for a single track, which is clear and distinct from siblings like tidal_get_track or tidal_get_track_playback_info. It does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling, but the lyrics/subtitles scope makes the purpose 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisite about the required track_id. Usage is only implied by the name and the phrase 'for one track', leaving the agent to infer that a track must already be identified.

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