eq_high_pass

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It clearly discloses the primary mutation (adds a high-pass filter with frequency and slope), though it does not mention whether the effect chain is appended/replaced or any failure modes.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler; the key parameters and their meanings are front-loaded and immediately useful.

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?

For a simple 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the operation and the two non-obvious parameters, though a note about where the filter is placed in the chain would add extra context.

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 has no parameter descriptions, so the description fills in meaning for freq and slope (including valid slope values). track_id is only implicitly explained as the target track, which is still reasonably clear from 'to a track' and the required schema field.

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 a specific action ('Add a high-pass filter'), target ('to a track'), and key parameters ('freq', 'slope'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like eq_low_pass and eq_tilt.

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 purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer when to use it (when high-pass filtering is needed), but it does not explicitly contrast with eq_low_pass/eq_tilt or state when not to use it.

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