game_audio_effect

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

Annotations are minimal (only title), so description carries full burden. It implies mutation ('add/remove/configure') but does not disclose side effects, permissions needed, or impact on existing audio. For a tool modifying audio bus effects, 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 very short (four words) but this is under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. It lacks necessary elaboration expected for a 5-parameter tool with nested objects.

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?

With no output schema and moderate complexity (5 params, nested object), the description should explain expected behavior after applying effects, but it does not. The tool's purpose is stated but not fully contextualized.

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 coverage is 100% and descriptions are basic labels (e.g., 'Action: add, remove, configure, list'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it does not clarify the 'properties' object structure or the role of 'index'. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does heavy lifting.

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 handles adding, removing, and configuring audio bus effects, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like game_audio_bus (managing buses) and game_audio_play (playing audio). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from game_audio_spatial or other effect-related tools.

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, when to choose 'add' vs 'remove' vs 'configure', or prerequisites. The description is purely functional with no contextual advice.

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