transport_play

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states 'Play', which implies starting playback, but lacks details on whether it replaces current playback, starts from beginning, or any side effects. For a simple play action, this is adequate but not rich.

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, short sentence that is completely front-loaded and contains no superfluous information. Every word is necessary and clear.

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 the simple nature of the tool (one required param, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain the implications of 'play' (e.g., does it affect other layers) or provide operational context. It covers the basics but lacks completeness for a deeper understanding.

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 already provides 100% coverage with enum descriptions. The description repeats 'layer to play' without adding new semantic meaning. Thus, it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding beyond 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?

The description clearly specifies the action 'Play' and the resource 'layer', listing the exact possible values (presentation, announcement, audio). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on layer playback rather than other transport or trigger actions.

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 that this tool is used to play a specific layer, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like transport_pause or other trigger tools. No exclusions or when-not-to-use context is given.

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