sonic_start_recording

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of explaining side effects, but it only states that the recorder starts. There's no mention of whether existing recordings are cleared, whether the operation is asynchronous, or what happens with the collect_ms parameter. The word 'built-in' suggests a native feature, but that's insufficient.

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 with every word earning its place. It contains no filler 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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are covered elsewhere, but the description still lacks essential context like parameter semantics and usage prerequisites. The completeness is insufficient for a tool with a non-trivial parameter and many siblings.

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 schema has one parameter, collect_ms, with no description, and the description does not mention it at all. With 0% schema description coverage, this leaves the parameter completely unexplained, and the agent cannot determine its purpose from the name alone.

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 verb 'Start' and specifies the resource as 'Sonic Pi's built-in WAV recorder', making the primary action clear. However, it doesn't distinguish from the sibling tool 'sonic_record_file', which may also start a recording, so there's no explicit differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sonic_stop_recording or sonic_save_recording, nor any prerequisites (e.g., Sonic Pi must be running). This leaves the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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