add_audio_bus

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses two important behaviors: the operation affects live audio state immediately, and persistence requires manual saving of the bus layout. This goes beyond simply saying 'add' and gives the agent actionable knowledge about side effects and persistence.

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 that front-loads the core purpose and adds two key behavioral notes. No wasted words; every clause earns its place.

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 there are 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse to fully equip an agent. It covers the main action and persistence but omits all parameter semantics, potential failure modes, or implications of different parameter values. The agent would likely need to guess or rely on examples.

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%, and the description does not compensate by explaining any of the six parameters (name, mute, send, solo, volume_db, at_position). The agent must infer parameter meanings solely from names/types, which is insufficient for a tool with this many parameters.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Add an audio bus to the AudioServer'. It uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('audio bus'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'set_audio_bus' or 'add_audio_bus_effect' by focusing on the bus itself.

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 provides some context about usage—'changes live audio state' and 'save the bus layout manually to persist'—which implies when to use it and what to do afterward. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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