get_v1_search_music

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-schema context that annotations cannot express: this is a live upstream Instagram request and is billed per call, which materially affects how an agent should budget invocations.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose before the alternative and the cost note. Every sentence adds signal, though the trailing '(GET /v1/search/music)' endpoint path is mild boilerplate that an agent rarely needs given the tool name already encodes the versioned route.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description would be the place to sketch return shape, and it does not. However, for a single-parameter search tool it covers purpose, the key alternative, and the notable live/billed behavior, leaving only result-format details unstated.

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% and there is one required parameter, so the description must carry the load. It does specify the query accepts a song or artist keyword, which is real semantic guidance beyond the bare schema field name; only the exact matching behavior (fuzzy vs exact, pagination) is left unspecified.

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+resource+domain ('Search Instagram music tracks by keyword') and immediately clarifies the query accepts song or artist names. It explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling get_v2_track_by_id, so an agent can disambiguate without opening either schema.

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?

Gives a clear routing rule: keyword search here, but use get_v2_track_by_id when you already know a single track. It does not cover other plausible alternatives in the large sibling set (e.g. hashtag/location search), but for a music search the primary alternative is named and its trigger condition is stated.

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