suno_extract_vocals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral burden. It mentions returning a Task ID and audio info, but does not clarify the asynchronous nature of the task, possible delays, or permission requirements. A note on callback usage would improve transparency.

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 concise with a clear structure: purpose, usage scenarios, and return info. It is slightly verbose with the bullet list, but overall 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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description provides sufficient context for usage. It covers the main parameters and return information, though it could mention task tracking or storage implications.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra value beyond schema descriptions, such as noting the vocal extraction range. It does not explain the return format beyond what is stated.

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 action ('Extract the vocal track') and the resource ('from a generated song'), and further explains stem separation. It is distinct from sibling tools like suno_all_stems_music.

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 'Use this when:' section lists three specific scenarios, providing good context. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it relative to siblings.

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