add_sound_strip

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether the sequencer must be open, error conditions, or side effects beyond the core add operation. While it does mention the return value, that is partially covered by the output schema and does not compensate for the lack of behavioral context.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by Args and Returns sections. It is appropriately sized for 6 parameters, though the Returns section is somewhat redundant since an output schema exists and the description does not need to explain return values.

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?

Given 6 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, and an output schema, the description covers parameter semantics thoroughly but lacks usage guidelines and behavioral transparency. It is adequate for an agent to invoke the tool but leaves gaps in context about when and under what conditions it should be used.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate fully. It provides detailed semantics for all 6 parameters: accepted file formats for filepath, optionality of name, valid range (1-128) for channel, meaning of frame_start and start_offset, and the 0-100 range with a note that volume 1.0 leaves audio unchanged. This is excellent compensation for the missing schema descriptions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Add an audio file to the sequencer as a sound strip.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_image_sequence_strip, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., add_image_sequence_strip), nor does it state prerequisites or conditions. It simply describes the operation without any when-to-use context.

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