create_metasound_preset

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false). The description adds real value beyond that: it reveals the two-step transient-builder-then-persist flow, that it writes a new /Game asset, and the exact return shape. This is meaningful behavioral context on top of what annotations 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?

Two sentences plus a return line, front-loaded with the action and the mechanism. The engine-class detail is slightly verbose but earns its place by clarifying the transient-vs-persisted distinction.

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 4 params and full schema coverage but no output schema, the description compensates by spelling out the return object fields (preset_path, preset_type, success, saved, already_exists). Complete enough for an agent to invoke and interpret results.

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 all four parameters are already documented, and the description adds only the preset_type alternatives ('source' or 'patch') already implied by the builder names. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 and resource ('Creates a MetaSound preset') and distinguishes from siblings (create_metasound_source, create_sound_modulation_patch) by naming the source/patch template asset as input. An agent can tell this creates a persisted new /Game asset, not a transient builder.

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?

Implies usage (you must have an existing source/patch asset) but never states when to prefer this over create_metasound_source or create_sound_modulation_patch, and provides no exclusions. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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