create_audio_track

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains the insertion behavior of the index parameter but does not disclose return values, error handling, or whether the track is added to the session view. For a simple create operation, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 two concise sentences plus a parameter bullet. It is front-loaded with the purpose and provides necessary details without filler.

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 one-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description covers the core function and parameter semantics. It omits potential return values and error scenarios, but these are less critical given the simplicity of the operation.

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 input schema only lists 'index' with a default value and no description. The description adds critical semantics: 'Position to insert the track. -1 = append at end (default)', fully compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Create a new audio track in the session', using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_midi_track by explicitly specifying 'audio'.

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?

The description implies use when an audio track is needed, especially contrasted with create_midi_track, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria. The context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool appropriately.

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