set_audio_track_pitch

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true). The description's inline return object adds the useful fact that the operation writes keys and persists (keys_written, saved, save_error), but does not expand on permissions, reversibility, or side effects beyond what the annotations imply.

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 a single tight sentence, followed by an inline return signature. The returns blob is verbose but substitutes for the missing output schema, so it earns its place.

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 no output schema present, the description compensates by fully specifying the return object, and it covers the dual invocation mode. For a focused mutation tool whose annotations already carry the safety profile, this is nearly complete.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description's 'omit to set constant value' phrase lightly reinforces the time_seconds semantics but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Set the PitchMultiplier channel on an audio section', with the scope clarified as either a constant value or a timed key. This is distinct from siblings like set_audio_track_volume or set_audio_section_properties, though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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 parenthetical '(default value or at a specific time)' implies the two invocation modes and their effect, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance versus the many neighboring audio/sequence-track setter tools. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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