audio_add_stream_player

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the action is 'add' (a write operation) but does not disclose side effects, reversibility, or permission needs. The return type is mentioned as 'success message or error' but lacks depth.

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 description is well-structured with Args and Returns, and front-loads the purpose. However, it repeats parameter information that is also in the schema, making it slightly longer than necessary. Still clear and easy to parse.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description covers the core functionality but lacks details on error handling, prerequisites (e.g., open scene), and behavior when parent node doesn't exist. It is adequate for a simple operation but not fully 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 0%, but the description adds value for 'player_type' by listing possible values and for 'autoplay' by explaining its boolean meaning. Other parameters like project_path, scene_path are not elaborated beyond their names, so overall adds moderate semantic value.

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 tool adds an audio stream player node to a scene, with specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like audio_configure_bus or audio_set_stream, though the purpose is distinct enough.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context. It only states what it does, leaving the AI agent without clear usage boundaries.

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