add_audio

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals only the core effect ('add an audio clip') and implies mutation, but gives no context about side effects, prerequisites like an open timeline, parameter behavior, or what happens in the project state.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the action and object type. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity borders on under-specification, which is the reason it isn't a 5.

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 six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, a description that only says 'Add an audio clip (music bed / VO)' is far from sufficient. The agent lacks parameter definitions, defaults, workflow context, and any sense of how the clip integrates with the project, making correct invocation implausible.

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 none of the six parameters (asset, src_in, volume, src_out, track_id, timeline_in) are explained by the schema. The description only mentions 'audio clip' generically and provides no meaning or relationship to the parameters, leaving the agent unable to determine correct values.

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 states a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('audio clip'), with clarifying examples 'music bed / VO'. This narrows the purpose relative to generic sibling tools like add_clip or add_asset, though it does not explicitly draw that distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_clip, add_asset, or add_track. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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