Analyze audio

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses that analysis takes seconds, does not count as a run, changes nothing, returns data in `metadata`, and saves the same data to the results folder. These are meaningful operational details that annotations alone do not provide.

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 three short sentences, front-loads the purpose, then gives usage guidance and behavioral context. Every sentence adds useful information with no 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?

Given the single required parameter, full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description provides everything an agent needs: what it analyzes, when to use it, speed, cost/run semantics, and where the result appears.

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?

There is only one parameter, file_path, and the schema description coverage is 100%, including accepted file extensions and tilde expansion. The description does not add further parameter-level details, so the schema does the work; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Analyze a track') and enumerates the outputs: BPM, key, loudness, and other characteristics. This clearly distinguishes it from the generation-oriented sibling tools such as generate_music and stem_split.

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?

It gives an explicit selection rule: use this first whenever the user asks for tempo, key, or loudness. It also clarifies why: it is the fastest tool, does not count as a run, and changes nothing, which helps an agent choose it over slower or costly alternatives.

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