get_lyric

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 the return value (JSON with original and translated lyrics) but does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or discuss error handling, permissions, or side effects. The expected output is somewhat transparent, but more context would be beneficial.

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 very concise, using a clear 'Args' and 'Returns' structure. It is front-loaded with the main action and each line provides necessary information without redundancy. No filler or irrelevant content.

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-parameter get tool, the description covers the purpose, parameter, and return format. It is adequate for basic use, but lacks guidance on edge cases, prerequisites, or when to opt for alternative tools. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but usage context is still missing.

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 input schema only provides the title 'Song Mid' with no description. The tool description adds '歌曲的 MID 标识符' (song's MID identifier), which gives the parameter clear meaning and purpose. This compensates for the schema's lack of detail, making the parameter understandable.

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 starts with '获取歌词' (Get lyrics), which clearly identifies the action and resource. The parameter 'song_mid' further specifies the target. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_song_detail, though the resource is distinct.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any context, exclusions, or alternatives such as get_song_detail. Users are left to infer usage from the name alone.

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