music_generate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions input requirements for cover models but omits details like generation time, cost, storage, rate limits, authentication, or side effects. This is insufficient for a complex 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 brief and efficient: two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides critical use-case variations. Every phrase earns its place.

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 11 parameters (including a nested object), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain return values, error handling, or usage of many parameters (e.g., audio_setting, stream, output_format). The tool's complexity demands more comprehensive documentation.

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 only 9% (only 'lyrics' has a description). The description adds meaning for a few parameters (lyrics, is_instrumental, and cover model inputs), but the remaining nine parameters (e.g., prompt, stream, output_format, audio_setting) are left unexplained, failing to compensate for low 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 'Generate music' with a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes subtypes: lyrics for vocal tracks, instrumental flag, and cover models requiring additional parameters. This differentiates it from sibling tools like speech, image, and video generation.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to set is_instrumental and that cover models require audio_url, audio_base64, or cover_feature_id. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare with alternatives, though sibling tools are distinct in media type.

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