Search

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

Adds valuable context beyond annotations: it warns about paid API credit consumption and the confirm=true requirement, and clarifies that despite being a POST, it does not publish to social platforms. This helps reconcile the readOnlyHint=false annotation without contradicting it.

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?

Front-loaded purpose followed by usage hint and behavioral warnings. Four short sentences with little waste, though the 'type=podcasts' sentence could be seen as non-earning if it references a non-existent parameter.

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 no output schema and 100% schema coverage, the description covers purpose, credit cost, confirm requirement, and non-publishing behavior. However, the phantom 'type' parameter is a gap, and the account parameter's role is not elaborated beyond the schema.

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 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description references 'type=podcasts' even though no 'type' parameter exists in the schema. This phantom parameter is misleading and likely to confuse an agent trying to invoke the tool correctly. Other parameters are only restated or left to the schema.

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 (Search) and resource (Spotify for tracks, artists, albums, episodes, podcasts, audiobooks). This clearly distinguishes it from detail-oriented siblings like spotify_artist or spotify_track, though it does not explicitly name alternatives. The 'type=podcasts' hint references a parameter not in the schema, adding slight confusion.

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 an explicit use case: 'Use type=podcasts when you need podcast ids for the podcast endpoints.' It also states a key requirement: 'requires confirm=true' for credit-consuming calls. No when-not guidance or named alternative tools, but the context is clear.

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