Find a sound

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: the result is a durable mp3 with start/end positions, and pick selects another candidate from the current TikTok-derived set. This is useful context that the schema and annotations do not provide. No contradiction with the annotations exists.

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 entire description fits into one dense sentence with examples and the key caveat about TikTok's current sounds. There is no filler, and the most important information—what the tool returns and how to invoke it—is front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description still tells the agent the essential return shape (durable mp3 and placement) and the main input modes. It does not explain no-result or error behavior, but for a simple finder with open-world annotations this is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 carries the full burden for parameter meaning. It maps query to name/moment, url to link types (TikTok sound, meme-sound page, post, audio file), and pick to alternative-candidate selection. It could be more precise about pick's numbering and whether parameters are mutually exclusive, but it compensates well for the bare schema.

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 states exactly what find_sound does: find a sound for an edit by name, moment, or link, and return a durable mp3 plus its start/end placement. It goes beyond the title and distinguishes this tool from generic TikTok search or music-generation siblings by specifying the output and the three lookup routes.

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 intended use case is clear: an editor needing a sound by name, described moment, or source link. The description also notes that named/described sounds are based on what TikTok currently uses, which helps the agent understand the data source. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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