audio_report_plan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It does not disclose what a 'report plan' is, whether it is read-only, what it returns, or any side effects. 'Hash-bound' is unexplained, and optional curves are mentioned but not elaborated.

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?

A single sentence with no redundant words. The main action is front-loaded, and the optional features are stated compactly. Every word earns its place.

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?

With 11 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is grossly insufficient. An agent cannot infer how to construct a valid request, what the plan should contain, or what happens after execution. Missing definitions of parameters and expected behavior.

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 0%, and the description provides no parameter details. It mentions 'raw, 1/48, ERB, and frequency-dependent curves' but does not map them to any of the 11 parameters. Required parameters baseName and assessment are entirely unexplained.

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 'Create' and resource 'report plan' with output formats (Markdown, HTML, JSON). However, 'hash-bound' is ambiguous and the description does not differentiate from sibling plan tools like audio_eq_proposal or audio_filter_export_plan, which also create plans.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, typical scenarios, or why one would choose this plan tool over others. Only a single sentence describing the action.

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