Live Record

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the output location and file-naming scheme and that the flag toggles recording off, but it says nothing about prerequisites (must a live session be running?), permissions, or whether an existing file is overwritten.

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?

A single tight sentence with the destination front-loaded and the toggle behavior appended after a semicolon. No wasted words, though the '<project>' and '<time>' placeholders are left unexplained.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a 2-param tool with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description is adequate but leaves the relationship to live_start/live_stop and the meaning of the 'safety chain' unexplained.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the effect of on=False and embeds project into the <project>/live/rec_<time>.wav path, giving both params some meaning, but it never names them explicitly or clarifies the default-on behavior 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?

States a specific verb (record) and resource (the live output, after the safety chain) plus a concrete destination path pattern. It is distinguishable from generic siblings like live_start/live_stop, but it does not explicitly say how it relates to those 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?

The 'on=False stops it' clause implies the on/off usage pattern, so an agent can infer how to start and stop. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus live_start, live_stop, or live_track, which are nearby siblings.

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