fairlight_apply_preset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects (e.g., overwriting existing effects), permissions, reversibility, or the potential global application caveat mentioned in the track_index schema description. This is a minimal disclosure for a mutation tool.

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, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. No wasted words or redundant elaboration.

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 tool is a simple apply operation, but the description and schema omit prerequisites (e.g., existing audio track, timeline state) and potential caveats beyond the note about global application in the schema. With an output schema present, return values may be covered, but overall context is adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, with both parameters well-documented (exact preset name, 1-based track index). The tool description adds no additional parameter context, but the schema already provides strong semantics, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Apply a Fairlight audio effect preset to an audio track' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly stating the tool's function. It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fairlight_get_presets or fairlight_insert_audio.

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?

Usage is implied by the action: apply a preset to a track. The schema description for preset_name references fairlight_get_presets, suggesting a prerequisite workflow, but there is no explicit when-to-use or alternatives mention.

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