music_analyze

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates extraction/analysis but does not disclose whether it is read-only, what the output format looks like, or any side effects. The behavioral transparency is minimal beyond the implied analysis nature.

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, focused sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the 'NEW (Audio Intelligence)' label and clearly states the tool's purpose.

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 schema and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to cover all available extraction options, mislabels one, does not explain the audio_id parameter, and does not clarify whether the extract field is optional or what the default behavior is.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It mentions some enum values (tempo, structure, instrumentation) but omits others (energy_curve, vocal_characteristics, motifs). It also introduces 'mood' which is not in the schema's enum, potentially misleading. The required parameter audio_id is not described at all.

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 tool extracts tempo, structure, instrumentation, and mood from music, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool sound_analyze, though the focus on 'music' hints at 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 music_analyze versus sound_analyze or other alternatives. The description does not mention use cases, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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