Analyze audio

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that results land in `metadata`, but it says nothing about whether analysis is synchronous or requires a follow-up retrieval call.

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?

Two short sentences with the core deliverable and output location front-loaded. 'and other characteristics' is mild filler, but the description is otherwise tight and waste-free.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't detail return values, and it does point to `metadata`. For a single-parameter read-only tool this is nearly complete; only the sync/async behavior is unaddressed.

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 and schema description coverage is 100% (the schema already documents accepted file formats and ~ expansion). The description adds no parameter detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Analyze') and resource ('a track') and enumerates the extracted characteristics (BPM, key, loudness). It is clearly distinct from the generative/stem siblings, though it never names an alternative explicitly to reinforce the distinction.

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?

Correct usage is implied — point it at an audio file to obtain its characteristics — but there is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no routing to or away from siblings such as list_results for retrieving results.

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