Preparar manifiesto de canción

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable context by specifying the target file and directory ('song-manifest.json bajo sessions/') and explicitly excluding plan execution. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it omits details like overwrite behavior or side effects.

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 sentence with two clauses, efficiently conveying the core action and a key boundary. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple write action but lacks context about how parameters influence the manifest, prerequisites, or how it fits into the broader workflow with sibling tools like preview_song_preparation. The output schema exists, so return values are not a concern, but the operational context is thin.

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 description provides zero explanation of the six parameters. With 0% schema coverage, the agent must rely entirely on the schema's bare type/default/enum information. The description does not compensate, leaving the meaning of fields like analysis_level or source_kind unclear.

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 the specific verb 'Escribe' (writes) with a concrete resource 'song-manifest.json' and location 'sessions/'. It also explicitly notes what the tool does not do ('no ejecuta el plan de REAPER'), which clearly distinguishes it from execution-oriented sibling tools like preview_song_preparation.

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 clear context that this tool is for writing a song manifest and doesn't execute the REAPER plan, providing an explicit when-not. However, it does not name alternative tools or describe the workflow context (e.g., when to use before preview_song_preparation).

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