Preview playlist merge

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, meaning the tool may have side effects, yet the description's 'Preview' framing strongly implies no state change. This is a contradiction. Additionally, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations—it does not clarify whether any state is modified, what the preview output contains, or how it interacts with commit tools.

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?

The description is a single short sentence with no structural waste, but it is severely under-specified for a tool with four parameters and non-trivial behavior. Conciseness here comes at the cost of necessary information.

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?

Given four undocumented parameters, a contradiction with annotations, and no explanation of how this preview relates to the commit step or what the preview return contains, the description is substantially incomplete. An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but parameter semantics and behavioral context are missing.

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 none of the four parameters are documented in the schema. The description does not mention any parameter (playlist_id, source_playlist_id, allow_missing, allow_duplicates), leaving their meaning entirely 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?

The description states a specific verb (preview copying) and resource (one playlist into another), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like preview_create_playlist or preview_add_tracks_to_playlist. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the commit action that would perform the actual merge, so it falls 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?

The word 'Preview' implies a dry-run before committing, which gives implicit usage context. But there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like tidal_commit_action, nor any mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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