effect_paulstretch

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

The description does not disclose whether the effect is destructive, reversible, or how it modifies the audio beyond stretching. It lacks details about side effects, output behavior, or safety, which is a significant gap for an audio processing tool.

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, using a clear header and a parameter list. It provides essential information without unnecessary verbosity, making it easy to parse and understand.

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?

It includes the prerequisite of selecting audio, but does not specify the scope (e.g., selection vs. whole track), output behavior, or how it interacts with the project. Lacks details on whether the processing is reversible or if there are any side effects on surrounding audio.

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?

Both parameters are well explained: stretch_factor is described as the amount of stretch with a default of 10, and time_resolution is explained as affecting quality and speed, with a default. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's title and default values.

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 it is an 'extreme time-stretch effect' that 'creates ambient/drone textures,' which is a specific and distinctive function. It is distinct from other effects like change_tempo or change_speed, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides a prerequisite ('Select audio first') and parameter explanations, but does not explicitly contrast with alternative effects. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over other time-stretching or modulation effects, leaving some ambiguity in tool selection.

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