wwise_audit

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

With no annotations, the description effectively discloses read-only nature, default checks, and that the findings list is capped (matching the 'max_findings' parameter). Behavior is well explained.

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 sentences: first states purpose and read-only nature, second lists checks and output. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete enough for an audit tool. Could optionally mention that results are returned immediately (not real-time).

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 coverage is 0%, but description fully explains the 'checks' parameter (list of specific check names, default all) and 'max_findings' parameter (cap on findings). Adds semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it is a 'Read-only project health audit', lists specific checks, and describes output format (counts + findings list). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'wwise_fix_all' (fixes) and 'wwise_inspect' (inspects).

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?

Implied usage for project health auditing, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus others (e.g., wwise_status, wwise_compat_check). No prerequisites or conditions mentioned.

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