Browse bands

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds one useful behavioral fact, the '(first limit rows)' truncation, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or what a band record contains. Given the annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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 wasted words, and the parenthetical about limit adds real information rather than padding. It could be slightly tighter, but nothing is superfluous.

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 three-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: it conveys what gets returned and the truncation rule. It omits any detail about result ordering, records returned, or interplay with search_bands, leaving clear gaps.

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 a moderate 67%: limit and value are documented in the schema, while 'by' has only an enum. The description restates the three filter axes and the 'coarse' genre nuance, but adds little syntax or format detail beyond what the enum and value description already provide.

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 gives a specific verb (List) and resource (bands from the catalog) and enumerates the three filter axes (country, coarse genre, first letter). It is clearly distinguishable from get_band/random_band, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling search_bands.

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?

The enumeration-based phrasing ('by country, coarse genre, or first letter') implies a browsing use case as opposed to a keyword lookup, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement or reference to the search_bands alternative. Guidance is only implied.

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