fmod_MixerBusEffectChain_addEffect

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions creating an effect and returning a ManagedObject, but omits details like side effects, permissions, what happens on failure, or whether existing effects are affected. For a creation tool, this is insufficient.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the main action. The cross-reference '[method · MixerBusEffectChain.addEffect]' is slightly noisy but does not detract significantly.

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 tool's complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description is adequate for basic usage but lacks behavioral context. It does not explain return value meaning, error cases, or workflow implications, leaving gaps for an AI agent.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, such as clarifying effectDefinition accepts presets or strings, but largely repeats schema info. It does not explain the format of 'target' or provide examples.

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 creates an effect and adds it to the end of the chain, with specific verb 'Creates' and resource 'MixerBusEffectChain'. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'add' tools like fmod_AudioTrack_addAutomationTrack through its name and context, though it does not explicitly differentiate.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other methods of adding effects or when effectDefinition should be a preset vs. string. The description lacks prerequisites or exclusion criteria.

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