track_stereo_to_mono

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

The description does not disclose whether the operation is destructive (replaces the original track), creates a new track, or how it handles multiple tracks or the undo state. Without annotations, this lack of behavioral detail leaves the agent uncertain about side effects.

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 extremely concise and direct, using two short sentences. It states the action and the prerequisite without any fluff, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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?

The description gives a necessary precondition (selecting the track) but does not explain the result or any side effects, such as whether the original stereo track is replaced or if a new mono track is created. It is sufficient for a very simple tool but lacks a complete behavioral contract.

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 no parameters, so the schema is empty. The description does not need to add parameter details, but it refers to a 'selected track' which is an implicit context rather than a parameter. Since there are no parameters, the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the tool inherently implies.

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 a specific verb ('Convert') and a specific resource ('selected stereo track') with a clear outcome ('to mono'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like track_add_mono or track_add_stereo, which create new tracks, by targeting an existing selected track.

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?

The description provides a precondition ('Select the track first') but does not mention when to use this tool versus other possible alternatives (e.g., effects that convert stereo to mono) or any context where it should not be used. It gives minimal guidance on selection criteria.

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