search_playlist

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses only that the output is a URI to play, which the output schema already covers; it says nothing about auth requirements, result-count or ranking behavior, or what happens on no-match. This is thin for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

One short sentence with no waste, and the outcome (returning a playable URI) is front-loaded. It is efficient, though nearly too terse to be maximally useful.

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 one-parameter search tool with an output schema, the description covers the essentials and need not explain return values. However, the query format and selection among search siblings remain unaddressed, leaving a real gap 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 0% for the single required parameter 'query'. The description does not say whether the query is a playlist name, an artist plus playlist combination, a URL, or how partial matches are handled, so it does not compensate for the schema gap.

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 ('Busca una playlist') and even names the payload role ('devuelve el URI para reproducirla'). It is distinguishable from search_track by resource, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with search_track or get_my_playlists, which are the tools an agent would plausibly confuse it with.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus search_track (find a single track) or get_my_playlists (enumerate the user's own playlists). There is a hint of workflow intent ('para reproducirla') but no explicit context or exclusions.

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