Skip Previous

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior, but it only says it navigates backward. It does not explain active-device targeting, session/auth requirements, behavior at the start of a queue, or whether it restarts the current track.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Its brevity is efficient, even though other dimensions reveal missing 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?

For a simple playback-control tool with an output schema, the core action is understandable. However, with no annotations and an undocumented device parameter, the description omits relevant calling context such as which device is affected.

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?

The only parameter is optional 'device', and schema description coverage is 0%. The description never mentions the parameter or how to use it, so it adds no semantics beyond the bare 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?

The description states a specific playback action ('go back to the previous track'), so the action and target are clear. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as skip_next or play_track, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternative named. The only usage signal is the implied meaning of 'previous track'.

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