fmod_workspace_addEvent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full weight. It only states the basic action and return, but lacks details on side effects, such as whether the event is automatically added to a specific folder, if the project must be loaded, or any permission requirements.

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 a single sentence plus a method note, which is concise. However, the method tag '[method · workspace.addEvent]' is extraneous for an AI agent. Still, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Despite returning a ManagedObject, the description does not explain the return structure or any other outputs. No output schema exists, so more details would help. It also omits information about the event's initial state, such as default settings or whether it is immediately part of the workspace hierarchy.

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?

The description adds context for 'withSpatializer' (adding an FMOD spatializer) but contradicts the schema by implying 'name' is a string and 'withSpatializer' is a bool, while the schema accepts string, number, boolean for both. This inconsistency reduces clarity. However, with 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3, but the contradiction drops it to 2.

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?

Clearly states the action (adds an event), the resource (project), and the return value (ManagedObject). The verb 'add' and the noun 'event' are specific. The sibling tools include different actions like adding game parameters or tags, so this tool is distinctly identified.

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 versus alternatives such as fmod_create_event or other add tools. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or when not to use this tool.

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