describe_audio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions the AI models but omits side effects like cost, latency, or external dependencies. This is insufficient for a tool that sends audio to external APIs.

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, efficient sentence that conveys purpose, usage context, and outcome without any 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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential information. Minor gaps exist regarding output format or latency, but overall it is complete enough for the complexity level.

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 describes the single parameter with 100% coverage. The description adds minimal value beyond restating the purpose, but no further semantic information is needed given the schema's completeness.

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 states the verb ('send'), resource ('captured audio clip'), and outcome ('plain-English description'). It differentiates from sibling tools like analyze_audio, capture_audio, and diff_audio by focusing on description generation.

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 provides a usage context ('useful when something sounds wrong but you cannot describe it') but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives like analyze_audio.

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