effect_echo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses parameter ranges and defaults but does not mention whether the modification is destructive, reversible, or has any side effects. The behavioral traits beyond the parameters are not addressed.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for the overall purpose followed by a clear, bullet-like parameter list. Every sentence adds value with 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?

For a simple effect with two parameters, the description covers the core purpose and parameter semantics. It does not specify the return value or confirm whether the effect is permanent, but given the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema, this is mostly adequate.

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?

Although the schema has 0% description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining both parameters: 'delay' as 'Delay time in seconds' and 'decay' as 'Decay factor (0-1, lower = faster decay)'. This adds meaning beyond the schema's title and default values.

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 clearly states the tool applies an echo effect to the selected audio, using a specific verb ('apply') and resource ('echo effect'). It distinguishes from sibling tools such as effect_reverb or effect_amplify by naming the effect explicitly.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It merely states the action without context for decision-making.

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