Search songs by title

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/destructive safety, and the description adds valuable behavioral context: the underlying lyrics.com search matches titles and lyrics together, so results are locally ranked/filtered, and match='strict' filters further. This goes beyond annotation-only info.

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 slightly long (5 sentences) but every clause earns its place, front-loading purpose and then adding usage and behavioral nuance. No waste, though the final sentence could be split for readability.

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?

With an output schema and strong annotations, the description covers the key functional details: return fields, use cases, and the caveat about title matching. Minor gaps remain (e.g., pagination behavior, potential errors), but the description is adequate for safe 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 moderate (60%) and descriptions for title and match exist. The description adds meaning by explaining artist narrows results and elaborating the effect of match='strict', which compensates for undocumented page/limit/artist and ties parameters to behavior.

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 ('Find'), resource ('songs on lyrics.com'), and scope ('by their title'), and clearly distinguishes from siblings by mentioning its role in preparing to call get_lyrics and differentiating covers/versions.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use this when someone names a song...' and gives a second use case (distinguishing covers). It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling search_lyrics, but the guidance is clear enough for selection.

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