audio_measure

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well by explicitly stating the tool is non-destructive and does not impose a loudness target. It could go further by describing the return format or failure behavior, but the key safety-relevant traits are disclosed.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core measurement purpose, and every sentence earns its place. It spends no words on filler and adds a valuable clarification in the second sentence.

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?

For a single-parameter, read-only measurement tool, the description covers purpose and safety well. However, there is no output schema and no mention of what the tool returns or how measurements are reported, so an agent cannot fully anticipate the invocation result.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and the tool description never directly explains the 'path' parameter. The word 'source' weakly implies that the path points to the audio file being measured, but the description does not add meaningful detail about accepted formats, path types, or accessibility.

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 the specific verb 'Measure' and names precise resources: integrated LUFS, true peak, and loudness range. It also clarifies what the tool does not do, making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like audio_analyze or sound_assess.

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 clearly conveys that this is for measurement only: it does not normalize, edit, or prescribe -14 LUFS. This gives the agent useful exclusion criteria for selecting the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools for normalization or editing.

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