audio_trim

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 does disclose meaningful behavior: 'stream copy, lossless' (implying no re-encoding, with possible format limits), that a new file is created (original untouched), and the default output path. However, it doesn't address error behavior, whether start must precede end, or supported source formats.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first line, followed by a compact, well-organized arg list. Efficient and scannable, with no filler, though the args section could arguably be trimmed into prose.

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?

Parameter coverage is complete and an output schema exists to document return values. But given no annotations and it being a file-producing mutation tool, it omits practical constraints like stream-copy format compatibility, missing-file errors, and range validation. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining all four parameters: source (local path or URL), start (seconds or MM:SS/HH:MM:SS), end, and output_path (with default). This adds real meaning beyond the bare string schema, which otherwise offers no format hints.

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+resource ('Cut a section out of an audio file into a new file') and adds the lossless stream-copy detail. The purpose is unmistakable, though it only implicitly differentiates itself from audio_convert (conversion) and video_clip (video) rather than naming them.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. It never contrasts with audio_convert (which also deals with audio output files), video_clip (the video analog), or audio_waveform. No exclusions or alternative conditions are given; usage is only implied by the name.

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