effect_amplify

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states the prerequisite (select audio first) and explains the ratio's meaning and constraint (>0). It does not mention whether the effect is destructive or reversible, but for a simple gain change this is acceptable.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences plus a parameter description. No wasted words. The purpose and prerequisite are front-loaded. Every sentence 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the prerequisite, parameter semantics, and constraints. No missing information for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must fully explain the parameter. It provides the meaning ('amplification ratio'), examples (1.5 = 150%, 0.5 = 50%), a constraint (>0), and the default (1.0). This adds significant value beyond the schema's type and default.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'amplify' and resource 'selected audio'. The description distinguishes it from other effects like fade, reverb, etc., by specifying a linear ratio parameter. It also implies the prerequisite 'Select audio first', which helps differentiate from tools that don't require prior selection.

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 a prerequisite ('Select audio first') and explains the ratio parameter, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like normalize, compressor, or other amplitude-altering effects. Usage context is implied but not contrasted with siblings.

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