get_artist_discography

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 mentions paging behavior ('paged discography', 'offset') and default values, which adds useful context. However, it doesn't cover other behavioral aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, error conditions, or what 'release groups' specifically entails.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance and parameter details in a clear, bullet-like format. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words, making it highly efficient.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, but with an output schema), the description is reasonably complete. It covers purpose, differentiation, and parameters. The output schema likely handles return values, so the description doesn't need to explain them, but it could benefit from more behavioral context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining all three parameters: 'artist_id: The MBID', 'limit: Max results (default 25)', and 'offset: Paging offset'. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't elaborate on MBID format or paging constraints.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Get a paged discography') and resource ('release groups for an artist'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_artist_details' which only shows the first 10 results. It explicitly identifies the scope as 'complete discographies'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives: 'Use this for complete discographies; get_artist_details only shows the first 10.' This directly compares it to a sibling tool and specifies the use case.

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