play

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

Annotations only declare the generic mutation profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=false). The description adds genuinely new behavior: audio is emitted to physical speakers, playback loops indefinitely until stopped, and the agent cannot perceive the result. It does not say whether playback restarts from the beginning or resumes from a current position, which matters for a play tool.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler, and the core behavior (plays through speakers, loops until stopped) is front-loaded before the usage hint.

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 single-optional-parameter, non-destructive playback tool with no output schema, the description covers what an agent most needs: audio is produced, the agent cannot verify it, and playback continues until stopped. Only the resume-vs-restart and from_bar default behavior are left unstated.

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?

There is a single optional parameter (from_bar) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the semantics and the baseline is 3. The description's mention of looping loosely connects to the schema note that the bar must be inside the loop, but adds no default or format guidance.

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 (plays) and resource (the song) plus the output destination (user's speakers). The looping-until-stopped clause distinguishes it from the pause and stop siblings without needing to name them.

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?

"Use this when the user wants to listen" gives a clear positive selection condition, and "looping until stopped" implicitly points at stop/pause as the terminating tools. It stops short of explicitly naming the alternatives or stating when not to use it.

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