fmod_Event_play

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether playback starts from the beginning, whether it can be called multiple times, or if there are side effects (e.g., resetting the event). The one-line description is insufficient for 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 description is very short, containing only one sentence and a trailing reference. It is concise and clear, but could be slightly improved by removing the bracketed part. However, for a simple action, this level of conciseness is acceptable.

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 simplicity of the tool and lack of output schema, the description is minimal and fails to provide sufficient context. It does not explain the return value, effect on event state, or prerequisites like a valid event instance. More details would improve completeness.

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% (target parameter described in schema). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond specifying 'plays the event instance'. 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?

The description clearly states the action 'Plays the event instance', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like stop, pause, keyOff, etc. However, it lacks details on playback behavior (e.g., from beginning or resume).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to use play vs other event manipulation tools like stop or keyOff. The description provides no usage context.

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