compress_glue

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

The description discloses that it applies compression, which is a type of audio processing, but does not mention any side effects, such as whether it alters the audio destructively, or whether it affects other parameters. It also does not specify the behavior regarding the amount parameter beyond its range.

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 concise and to the point, using a single sentence to convey the purpose and parameter semantics. It is well-structured with the parameter explanation parenthetically.

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 is complete for a simple tool, but it lacks explicit information about the tool's return value or any additional effects on the project. Given the simplicity of the tool and the context from sibling tools, the description is mostly sufficient.

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 amount parameter is explained with its range and meaning, but the track_id parameter is not described. Since track_id is required and its purpose is inferred from the name, the description covers only half of the parameters.

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 that the tool is a gentle bus glue compressor, specifying the type and character of the effect. It differentiates from siblings like 'compress_smash' by using terms like 'gentle' and 'glue'.

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 does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives, such as 'compress_smash'. However, the name and descriptor 'glue' imply a use case for bus compression to glue mix elements together, but this is not directly stated.

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