add-markers-bulk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It only states the operation (add) but does not disclose side effects, prerequisites (e.g., valid comp or layer), edge cases, or whether it appends to existing markers. For a write operation, more transparency is expected.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and the second sentence gives actionable use context. Zero wasted words.

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?

Given moderate tool complexity and full schema coverage, the description covers purpose and primary workflow (audio waveform peaks). With no annotations or output schema, it could still mention potential errors or limits, but the current description is sufficient for basic correct use.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds the high-level intent (bulk adding) but no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, aligning with the baseline for full schema coverage.

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?

Clear verb 'Add' with resource 'markers' and explicit bulk scope ('multiple', 'at once'). Distinguishes from sibling 'add-marker' by emphasizing batch operation and supports both layer and composition markers.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: after analyze-audio-waveform to place detected peaks, or for any batch marker addition. Does not name alternative single-marker add-marker, but the context is clear enough.

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