Preview playlist edit

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description usefully adds the 'owned playlist' auth constraint and the preview (no immediate side effect) framing, but omits the crucial behavioral detail of how the preview is later committed.

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 waste, correctly leading with the verb and operation. It is efficient, though for a 0%-coverage schema the brevity leaves gaps rather than being ideally sized.

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 and annotations exist, so return values and the safety profile need not be explained. However, for a preview-mutation tool operating in a preview/commit pair, the missing link to the commit step leaves the definition short of complete.

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%, so the schema provides names but no meaning. The description maps 'title or description' to two of the three parameters and clarifies playlist_id must reference an owned playlist, but it ignores the length constraints (120/500) and adds no real constraint detail.

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 names a specific operation ('changing ... title or description') on a specific resource ('owned playlist'), distinguishing it from sibling preview tools like tidal_preview_add_tracks_to_playlist or tidal_preview_set_playlist_public. It is clear without opening the schema, though it does not position itself relative to the commit-side tools.

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 word 'Preview' and the ownership qualifier imply this is a staging/non-committing step, but the description never states the preview-then-commit workflow or names a commit sibling. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is given.

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