export_track

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that export is an attempt due to API limitations and directs the agent to workaround instructions. This is good transparency, though it could mention if any side effects or requirements exist.

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 concise sentences effectively convey purpose and key caveat. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with the main action.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters and no annotations, the description covers the main action and a limitation, but omits parameter details. Output schema may cover return values, so this is adequate but not thorough.

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 input schema has 3 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only mentions 'export a track to a WAV file', which implies output_path, but does not explain track_index, output_path format, or duration_bars. Parameters are inadequately described.

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 tool exports a track to a WAV file. The verb 'export' and resource 'track' are specific, and the output format is mentioned. Among siblings, there is no other export tool, so it is distinct.

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 notes 'attempt' and 'limited export support', advising to check the response for workarounds if export fails. This provides guidance on when the tool might not work and what to do, but does not compare to alternatives or exclude other tools.

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