auto_analyze_audio

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

Discloses synchronous operation and required audio loading. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. However, does not mention side effects (e.g., whether it modifies state), performance, or limitations. Covers basic behavior but not comprehensive.

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?

Four efficient sentences: purpose, synchronous note, return fields, prerequisite. No fluff, front-loaded purpose, well-structured.

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 no output schema, description adequately lists return fields and explains synchronous behavior. Provides prerequisite. Lacks detail on recommendation format but sufficient for a simple analysis tool.

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?

No parameters in schema, so baseline is 4. Description adds meaning by specifying the tool operates on 'current audio track', effectively documenting the implicit target. Schema coverage is 100% trivial.

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?

Description clearly states it analyzes the current audio track and recommends a pipeline. It specifies synchronous behavior and lists return fields. While it distinguishes from sibling tools by outputting a recommendation, it does not explicitly contrast with other analyze 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?

Provides one usage guideline: load audio into Audacity first. No explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among sibling tools. The context implies it's a preparatory step, but lacks direct when-to-use/when-not-to-use statements.

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