plugin_add_reverb

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only says it adds reverb and mentions parameter normalization, but does not disclose whether existing effects are preserved, whether the plugin is appended or replaces anything, or any other side effects.

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 clear sentences with no fluff. The parameter list is dense but directly adds useful context about normalization and allowed types.

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 provides enough to invoke the tool: target track, type choices, and normalized value ranges. It omits side effects and the meaning of name, but the core usage is clear.

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 the type enum, normalization to 0..1, and the wet amount for most effect parameters. However, it inaccurately refers to 'all other params' as normalized while track_id and name are strings, and leaves the meaning of name undefined.

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 specific action: adding a built-in reverb to a track. It is distinct from sibling plugin_add_* helpers by naming the exact effect type.

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 implies the intended use—when a track needs a built-in reverb—but does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over generic plugin_add or other effect helpers.

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