add_audio_bus

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is destructive, requires specific permissions, or affects existing audio busses. This is minimal transparency.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word is necessary, and there is no unnecessary detail or redundancy.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description lacks crucial context such as what happens after adding (e.g., bus position behavior when index is omitted), and does not mention any side effects or output. For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context to be complete.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 100% (both 'name' and 'index' have descriptions), the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 the action 'Add a new audio bus' and the target 'audio bus layout', making the purpose unambiguous. However, among siblings like 'add_audio_bus_config' and 'add_audio_bus_effect', it does not differentiate that this tool adds a bus (channel) versus a configuration or effect, so it lacks sibling distinction.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as 'add_audio_bus_config' or 'add_audio_bus_effect'. There is no mention of prerequisites or context (e.g., requires an existing audio bus layout).

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