add_audio_bus_effect

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

With no annotations, the description discloses two key behaviors: it 'changes live audio state' and requires manual saving to persist. This goes beyond the schema, though it omits details like return values or error conditions.

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?

One compact sentence, front-loaded with purpose, and every clause adds value (live state, persistence). No wasted words.

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 has 4 parameters including a nested 'params' object, yet the description offers no information about how to structure params for different effect types, what 'at_position' does, or return/error behavior. It is far from complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 barely addresses parameters: 'bus' and 'effect_type' are implicitly clear, but 'params' and 'at_position' are not explained. The description does not provide the necessary guidance for a nested object structure.

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 a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Add an audio effect to a bus's effect chain'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like add_audio_bus (adds a bus) and set_audio_bus (likely sets properties).

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 gives clear context: it modifies live audio state and requires manual saving to persist. It implies when to use (when adding an effect to a bus chain) but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or name them.

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