steward_audio_focus

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses pricing ($0.01 USDC on Base per call), payment flow (rail quotes via 402, server verifies exact scheme/network/token/payee), spend cap enforcement, and payer key security. Slight gap: doesn't explain what happens if quote exceeds caps or settlement failure behavior.

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 purpose and routing, then pricing/security details. Every sentence earns its place, though pricing details could be slightly condensed. Overall efficient and well-structured.

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 param tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, alternatives, default behavior, pricing, verification, spend caps, and key security. Missing only edge-case failure behavior, which is minor for a read-like audio focus tool.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds practical context: 'Optional length in minutes (1-120); omit for the rail default,' reinforcing omission behavior and default beyond schema description.

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+resource: 'Focus audio lane — steady Brian Booms soundscapes for deep work and concentration.' Distinguishes clearly from siblings by naming steward_audio_rest (winding down) and steward_audio_match (mood track).

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?

Explicit when to use ('Choose this for working') and when to use alternatives ('choose steward_audio_rest for winding down, or steward_audio_match when you want a track picked for a specific mood').

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