effect_bass_and_treble

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only describes the function and parameters, lacking information on whether the effect is destructive, applies to selection or entire track, or any side effects. This minimal disclosure leaves the agent uncertain about key behavioral aspects.

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 concise with two sentences: a clear purpose statement followed by an Args section listing parameters with ranges and defaults. Every sentence serves a purpose, no redundancy, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no nested objects, no output schema), the description covers the basics of what it does and parameter details. However, it omits behavioral context like whether it applies to the selected audio, real-time processing, or scope. A more complete description would include these contextual cues.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description provides meaningful parameter explanations: dB ranges and defaults for bass, treble, and gain. This adds value beyond property names, though it could be enriched with qualitative effects (e.g., 'increase bass for a warmer sound'). Still, the ranges and defaults are sufficient for basic usage.

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 explicitly states 'Adjust bass and treble frequencies with a simple tonal shaping tool,' which clearly identifies the verb (adjust), resource (bass and treble frequencies), and distinguishes it from sibling effects like effect_equalization or effect_high_pass_filter by emphasizing simplicity and specificity.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for quick tonal adjustments, but does not state when not to use it or provide comparisons to other effects like effect_amplify or effect_equalization. This is a basic level of implied usage.

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