search_songs

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

无任何注释提供，描述承担全部行为披露责任。描述仅列出返回字段，未说明搜索匹配逻辑（模糊/精确匹配）、是否区分大小写、排序行为、收录范围或外部来源行为。作为搜索工具，缺少对搜索执行细节的披露。

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?

单句描述，简洁高效。直接说明功能并列出返回字段，没有冗余信息。结构清晰，价值密度高。

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?

有输出schema存在可减轻返回格式负担，但仅2个参数却有0% schema描述覆盖率，且无注释，描述未解释参数含义和搜索行为。作为搜索工具，这个简洁度不足以支撑实际使用，特别是缺少与query_library的区分说明。

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描述覆盖率为0%，描述应完全补偿参数说明，但描述完全未提及任何参数。'query'的含义（关键词格式、是否需要精确匹配）和'limit'（上限默认值）均未在描述中说明。两个参数均无任何语义补充。

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?

描述明确说明了工具功能——按关键词搜索歌曲，并列出了返回的字段（标题/歌手/专辑/来源/是否已入库）。动词'搜索'+资源'歌曲'清晰。与兄弟工具有所区分（其他工具涉及下载、歌词、扫描、查询），但未明确说明与query_library的区别。

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?

描述暗示了'搜索歌曲'的用途，但没有明确说明何时使用此工具而非query_library等替代工具。没有排除条件或前置要求。搜索场景implied但未具体说明与其他库查询工具的区别。

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