Analyze WAV Mix Quality

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

The description adds context beyond the annotations by listing the specific measurements performed (loudness, dynamics, etc.) and confirming the read-only nature. This aligns with the readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that starts with the action verb and lists key measurable aspects. It is concise without unnecessary details.

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 having an output schema, the description does not cover parameter usage, edge cases, or guidance for the four parameters, especially target_lufs and target_true_peak_dbfs. The low schema coverage exacerbates this incompleteness.

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?

With only 25% schema description coverage (only the 'path' parameter is described), the tool description does not explain parameters like target_lufs, response_format, or target_true_peak_dbfs. This leaves the agent lacking understanding of how to set these parameters.

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 verb 'Measure', the resource 'WAV', and specifies the aspects measured: loudness, dynamics, peaks, clipping, and stereo balance. It also emphasizes that the file is not modified, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like vocaloid_analyze_vocal_stem.

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 implies usage for analyzing mix quality of WAV files, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like vocaloid_analyze_vocal_stem or other analysis tools. No exclusions or context are provided.

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