analyze_song

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It lists analysis outputs but omits whether the operation is read-only, what resources it consumes, error conditions, or side effects, which is a notable gap for an audio-processing 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?

The description is front-loaded and compact: first the tool purpose with outputs, then the parameter note. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant restatement of the schema title.

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 multi-output audio analysis tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose and path requirements. However, it omits sequencing with siblings such as generate_full_map and whether results are returned as data or written to disk, leaving clear gaps for an agent to infer.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the single parameter. It specifies that the path is for a local audio file, must be absolute, and supports mp3/ogg/wav, which meaningfully supplements the bare string schema, though it does not cover file existence or size limits.

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?

It states a specific verb and resource: precise analysis of a song file, and enumerates the returned metrics (BPM, offset, beat confidence, onsets, musical sections). It does not differentiate itself from siblings like generate_full_map, but the core purpose is clear.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or sequencing with sibling tools. The only contextual clue is that the path must be a local absolute path, which is parameter semantics rather than usage guidance.

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