eq_low_pass

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

With no annotations, the description alone carries the burden. It clearly says the tool adds a filter at a frequency, but it does not mention side effects, non-destructive nature, or how the `q` parameter affects behavior. It is accurate but minimal.

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?

A single, concise sentence that conveys the essential information without any filler or redundant phrases. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 filter operation, the description provides sufficient context: what it does, where it applies (track), and the key parameter. It does not mention output or potential side effects, but given the simplicity of the tool and the lack of an output schema, this is acceptable.

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 description explains `freq` explicitly and `track_id` implicitly ('to a track'), but `q` is not mentioned at all. Schema coverage is roughly 66%, which is not high enough to warrant a baseline of 3, and the description does not compensate for the missing parameter.

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 action ('add a lowpass filter') and the purpose ('darkening/muffling'), including the key parameter `freq` in Hz. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like eq_high_pass or eq_tilt by specifying a lowpass filter.

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 the intended use case (darkening/muffling) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., eq_high_pass) or when not to use it. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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