sound_capabilities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds 'local-first' and 'JSON-safe' as useful traits, but does not state that this is read-only, what authentication if any is needed, or any other runtime behavior beyond those two attributes.

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 redundant or filler content. It is appropriately sized for a simple discovery tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained in the description. For a zero-parameter discovery tool, the description is mostly complete, though it could say more about what the sound operation set covers or when to call it.

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 takes zero parameters, and the schema has 100% description coverage. Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool has a baseline of 4; there are no parameter semantics needing further explanation.

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 names a specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('bounded public sound operation set'), so the tool's basic function is clear. It implicitly distinguishes itself from video-focused capability tools by scoping to sound, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or clarify what the operation set contains.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like search_tools or video_capabilities. The description implies discovery use but gives no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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