davinci_analyze_audio_beats

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Analyzes' clearly indicates a non-destructive, read-only operation, though it does not explicitly mention side effects, permissions, or that it does not modify the audio.

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 a single, focused sentence with no filler, immediately conveying the tool's purpose. It is concise and well-structured.

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?

While the description is clear for a simple analysis tool, it omits what the tool returns (e.g., beat timestamps or cut points) and any prerequisites like having an audio track imported. The presence of an output schema is noted but not shown, so the description alone is not fully complete for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 0% and the tool description does not explain any of the parameters (audio_path, fps, max_duration_seconds). The names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to compensate for the missing schema details, leaving their roles ambiguous (especially fps).

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?

States a specific verb ('Analyzes') and describes the exact scope (tempo, downbeats, musical bars, frame-locked cut points) for rhythmic video editing, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that build reels or add markers.

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?

Implies usage for rhythmic video editing, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like davinci_build_beat_synced_reel or davinci_add_beat_marker. No direct guidance on conditions or exclusions.

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