Detect Audio Transients

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

Annotations only provide generic false hints, so the description carries the burden. It adds meaningful behavioral context: the tool returns candidates rather than definitive beats and explicitly says it doesn't modify the timeline. This goes beyond what annotations convey, though it doesn't discuss other potential 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?

The description is two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then immediately states the candidate nature and key exclusions. Every phrase earns its place.

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 output schema exists and the input parameters are fully documented, the description provides sufficient contextual framing: source is decoded audio peaks, results are candidates for review, and timeline changes are excluded. A slightly richer note about exact output shape or potential side effects beyond timeline would make it fully complete.

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 100%, and each parameter already includes ranges and defaults, so the description doesn't need to add parameter-level meaning. The tool description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema provides, which matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Find probable beat or edit-point transients from decoded audio peaks.' It clearly differentiates itself from beat-grid-accurate tools and timeline mutators, which is relevant given siblings like detect_silence and scene analysis tools.

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?

It provides clear context about intended use ('candidates for editorial review') and explicitly states what it does not do: it does not claim beat-grid accuracy or change a timeline. It stops short of naming a specific alternative tool, but the usage context is strong.

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