List favorite albums

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 only the collection scope ('My Collection') and a pagination hint, which is some value but nothing about rate limits, ordering defaults, or result size.

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 no wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity is arguably under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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. However, for a four-parameter paginated listing tool with 0% schema description coverage and no annotations about ordering, the description is only minimally sufficient.

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% across four parameters, yet the description says nothing about limit, offset, order, or order_direction. 'Page through' gestures at limit/offset but adds no semantics the agent can use, leaving the enum values and defaulting behavior unexplained.

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 (page through) and resource (albums saved in My Collection), which distinguishes it from tidal_list_favorite_tracks, tidal_list_favorite_artists and the other favorite-list siblings. It is clear but does not explicitly contrast itself with those siblings, so it stops 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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus tidal_list_favorite_playlists, tidal_list_playlists, or tidal_get_album_tracks. The word 'Page through' only weakly implies the tool is for iterating a large collection rather than fetching a single album.

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