capcut_add_audio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic operation ('Add an audio clip') and does not mention track selection behavior, whether new tracks are created, default insertion behavior, or any effects on existing timeline content.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is efficient. However, the phrase 'at a time' is ambiguous and the brevity comes at the cost of important context, so it is not an optimal example of concise structure.

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 14 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this one-sentence description is severely incomplete. It fails to mention required inputs like draft, file, and atSec, or key behaviors such as track allocation and defaults.

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 schema has only 36% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any of the 14 parameters or the 3 required ones. It adds no semantic value beyond the schema's own sparse descriptions of atSec, durSec, trackIndex, srcStartSec, and trackRenderIndex.

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 uses a specific action verb ('Add') and identifies the resource ('an audio clip'), which clearly separates it from sibling tools like capcut_add_video or capcut_add_image. It also hints at temporal/track placement with 'at a time on a track,' but the phrase is awkward and does not explicitly differentiate from other add tools beyond the media type.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of capcut_add_video, capcut_add_image, or capcut_add_track. The intended usage is only implied by the name and the action phrase, so the tool lacks the explicit 'use when/when not' context that would help an agent choose correctly.

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