export_render

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

Adds substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations: writes only absolute .wav paths, will not overwrite unless asked, session clips only sound if recorded into the arrangement, and the call returns an async job rather than the finished file. These are exactly the surprises an agent would otherwise hit.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and mode choice, then return/job semantics, then write-safety notes — a good ordering. It is a single dense paragraph with some stacked parentheticals, but almost every clause carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description steps in to describe the job handle, waiting on it, and the result payload (path plus file analysis). Remaining gaps are minor: no note on expected runtime for real-time renders or on failure behavior for invalid paths.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description still adds meaning by noting the beat range defaults to the whole song, that optional normalisation targets a loudness goal from master.targets, and that "fast" means the same mix rendered offline. Dither and bit-depth interplay with dithering is left entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Render the arrangement ... to a WAV file") with scope (start_beat to end_beat, default whole song). The real-time vs fast-offline framing and the "as the Export dialog does" analogy make it clearly distinct from siblings such as export_stems and agent_export_preview.

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?

Explains the two rendering modes and their tradeoff (real time vs faster-than-real-time identical mix), and tells the agent what to do with the returned job ("jobs.wait until done"). It does not explicitly say when to prefer export_stems or agent_export_preview over this, so exclusion guidance is missing.

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