spotify_get_playlists

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose that this requires an authenticated user token (and the playlist-read-private scope to see private playlists), whether followed-but-not-owned playlists are included, or how pagination behaves. Only the implicit read-only nature of 'Get' is conveyed.

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 short sentence with zero waste and the resource front-loaded. It is appropriately sized, though it is so terse that it barely does more than the name.

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 one-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally viable. However, it omits the auth/scope requirement and the ambiguity about whether the list covers owned vs. followed playlists, which an agent would need for correct 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 description coverage is 100% and the single optional 'limit' parameter is fully documented in the schema (including default 20 and max 50). The description adds no parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Get current user's playlists'), which is clear on its own and implicitly distinguishes it from the singular spotify_get_playlist and from spotify_get_saved_tracks/albums. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling it is not, so it does not reach a 5.

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 description gives no when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no pointer to alternatives such as spotify_get_playlist for a single playlist. An agent must infer usage purely from the name.

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