effect_invert

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation flips the phase of the selected audio, which is the core behavioral effect. However, it does not state whether the operation is destructive, whether it can be undone, or whether a selection is strictly required, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Two short sentences deliver the operation, target, and intended use with no filler. Every word contributes meaning and the key action is 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?

For a simple, parameterless effect, the description is essentially complete: an agent knows what the tool does and on what it operates. It does not explain output or undo behavior, but the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation make that acceptable.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so the description need not document any. The 0-parameter baseline of 4 applies, and no additional parameter explanation is required.

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 names the exact operation, 'Invert (flip phase)', and the target, 'the selected audio'. This is specific and unique among the many sibling effect tools. The phrase 'useful for phase cancellation' adds meaningful intent without ambiguity.

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?

It clearly states that the tool applies to selected audio and provides a concrete use case: phase cancellation. It does not enumerate alternatives or exclusions, but for a zero-parameter effect this is adequate contextual guidance.

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