Preview removing playlist media IDs

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is already structured. The description adds the 'owned playlist' requirement (an authorization constraint not in the schema), which is genuinely useful, but it does not explain what a 'preview' produces or how it relates to the commit tool, despite a preview implying no side effects.

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 filler; the action and scope come first. It is efficient, though the terseness leaves gaps that a slightly longer description could have covered.

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, and annotations cover the safety profile. Still, for a bulk-removal preview with a 500-item limit and a commit counterpart, the description omits the limit and the preview-to-commit relationship, leaving the agent with only a minimum-viable picture.

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 description must carry the load; it identifies both concepts (exact media IDs, owned playlist_id) but adds no detail on the media_ids max of 500, the ID format, or playlist_id constraints. It gives minimal semantic grounding but does not fully compensate for the empty schema descriptions.

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 action (preview removing) on a specific resource (media IDs from an owned playlist), and the word 'several' plus 'exact media IDs' implicitly distinguishes it from the singular by_id and the by_indices siblings. It stops short of naming an alternative explicitly, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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?

'Preview' conveys that this is a dry-run/non-committing step and 'owned playlist' implies an ownership prerequisite, which is useful selection context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not, and no mention of the commit step or the by_id/by_index alternatives.

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