mirelo_inpaint_audio_generate

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It states synchronous behavior and return of URL(s), but omits side effects (e.g., credit consumption, original asset modification), failure modes, or idempotency. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with core purpose and modality. Every word earns its place. No filler or repetition.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description should cover more context (error handling, permission needs, return format details). It only states input/output basics, leaving gaps for a tool with nested objects and multiple parameters.

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%; all parameters are documented. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's property descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's action: 'Synchronously replace a bounded segment of an audio clip with newly generated audio'. It explicitly names the operation (Inpaint_Audio, audio-only) and distinguishes from siblings like preflight/submit or with-video variants.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description mentions 'synchronously', hinting at its blocking nature, but doesn't contrast with asynchronous submit versions or explain when to prefer generate vs preflight.

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