List favorite playlists

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 pagination hint ("Page through") and says nothing about auth requirements, result ordering, or whether folders are included. Given annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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 ten-word sentence, front-loaded with the verb and scope. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 explained. However, for a 4-parameter tool with 0% schema description coverage and many near-identical favorite/list siblings, the description provides too little to guarantee 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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden — and it contributes almost nothing beyond the verb "Page through," which loosely implies limit/offset. The DATE/NAME order enum, ASC/DESC direction, defaults, and the 1-100 limit range are documented only structurally in the schema, not explained anywhere in prose.

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 (playlists) with scope qualifier (saved in My Collection), which distinguishes it from siblings like tidal_list_playlists and tidal_list_public_playlists. It does not, however, name those siblings explicitly to help an agent route between 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?

"saved in My Collection" implies the use case is favorited playlists vs. owned or public ones, giving implied context. There is no explicit when-to-use statement and no mention of the closely related tidal_list_playlists, tidal_list_playlists_and_favorites, or tidal_list_playlist_folders alternatives.

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