spectrogram

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Describes output as PNG, mentions mel spectrogram and contact sheet options. Could detail overwrite behavior but standard file write. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences: first states action and rationale, second gives usage guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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?

Explains output format (PNG) and purpose for harmonic content/silence inspection. Without output schema, this is adequate. Could mention resolution or size constraints but not critical given sibling context.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters. The description adds no extra semantics beyond what schema already provides (contact sheet tile, default bars per tile). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb 'Render' and resource 'mel spectrogram PNG' from WAV/FLAC files. Distinguishes from sibling tools by contrasting with 'numeric probe report' and explicitly mentions contact sheet for whole file review.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when a numeric probe report isn't enough' providing context for when to choose this over alternatives like probe_audio. Also mentions contact sheet option for reviewing whole piece, but no explicit when-not-to-use.

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