cassette_make_prompt

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behaviors. It only says 'build a prompt', but does not state whether it is read-only, mutates state, requires authentication, or what side effects occur. Very limited transparency.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded, but for a tool with 10 parameters and no schema descriptions, it is too brief to be useful. Every sentence should add value; this one is too terse.

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 10 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not describe return values, behavior, or parameter roles. The complexity demands much more detail.

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%, and the description fails to explain any of the 10 parameters. It mentions 'natural-language instruction' and 'session assets', but does not map these to parameters like instruction, session_id, or requires_assets. No additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the verb 'build' and resource 'complete Cassette edit prompt', distinguishing it from siblings like cassette_edit (which performs the edit) and cassette_answer_question. It indicates inputs: natural-language instruction and session assets.

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 vs. alternatives. With siblings like cassette_edit, cassette_answer_question, etc., the description does not help the agent decide which to invoke.

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