skill_game-audio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the domain and cost, without explaining what happens when called (e.g., generates text, returns audio files), required permissions, or side effects. This is critically insufficient for an agent to predict outcomes.

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, dense line in Chinese and English, conveying topic and cost efficiently. It is front-loaded with the key identifier '[Game Audio]'. However, a slightly more structured presentation (e.g., separating purpose from cost) could improve clarity.

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?

For a creative skill with no output schema, the description should explain what the tool produces (text? audio files? design plans?) and how to interact with it. It provides none of this context, leaving the agent without enough information to use it effectively.

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 covers 100% of parameters (one 'query' field). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's 'user input for this skill'; it does not specify expected format, language, or examples. Baseline 3 applies since schema coverage is high, but the description adds no value.

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 indicates it is a skill for game audio design, including sound effects, music, and ambient sounds. It specifies the domain and type of output, distinguishing it from sibling tools. However, it lacks an explicit verb specifying the tool's action (e.g., 'generates' or 'creates'), so it is not a perfect 5.

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 alternatives, no prerequisites, limitations, or context for invocation. The only extra information is the cost per call, which does not help an agent decide when to select this tool.

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