Detect silence

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly indicates this is a read-only analysis (find, returns) and describes the output structure (silent ranges and keep-segments). It does not explicitly state 'does not modify the input' but that is strongly implied by the verb 'Find' and the return semantics, making it transparent enough.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes a practical usage tip. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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?

The description covers the core functionality, output, and intended usage, which is sufficient for a tool with 3 parameters and no output schema. It lacks some explicit details like the format of ranges (e.g., start/end times) but these are inferable from the schema and the tool's nature. Overall, it is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (noise_db, input_path, min_duration). The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, which is the baseline for full coverage. No extra clarification needed.

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 function with a specific verb and resource: 'Find silent stretches in the audio track.' It also specifies the output ('Returns silent ranges plus the non-silent segments to keep') and distinguishes it from sibling tools by mentioning downstream use with trim/concat tools.

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 gives a clear use case: 'useful for cutting dead air' and even suggests feeding keep-segments into trim_video/concat_videos. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives, but the context is sufficiently clear for an agent to decide when to invoke this tool.

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