get_album_detail

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses output behavior by listing return fields (album name, artist, release date, description, song count). However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, if authentication is needed, or any error/rate-limit behavior, leaving common concerns unaddressed.

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 compact and well-structured with an Args/Returns layout. The purpose is front-loaded in the first line, and every sentence provides necessary information without filler.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so the description need not detail return structure. However, it omits usage guidelines and fails to contextualize album_mid sufficiently, making it only minimally viable for a single-parameter read tool.

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 schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'album_mid' as '专辑的 MID 标识符' (album's MID identifier), which is only slightly more informative than the schema title. It does not explain what a MID is or how to obtain it, leaving a significant 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?

The description begins with '获取专辑详情' (get album details), a specific verb+resource pair that clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_album_songs and get_album_cover. It leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the set of sibling tools (e.g., get_album_songs, get_song_detail), the description should explicitly differentiate or state selection criteria, but it does not.

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