effect_wahwah

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 lists parameter ranges and defaults, omitting critical details such as whether the effect is destructive, reversible, or affects only the selection. This is insufficient for an effect tool.

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 and well-structured, with the purpose front-loaded and parameters listed in a readable format. It wastes no words, though it could be integrated into a single sentence for the purpose.

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 and no annotations, the description should cover return values, side effects, or prerequisites. It only explains parameters, missing important context like whether the tool modifies the waveform in place or returns a new track.

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 adds value by listing each parameter with its name, range, and default. However, it lacks explanations of what each parameter controls (e.g., 'modulation depth' meaning), which would help the agent understand the effect. The provided info is basic but useful.

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 starts with 'Apply wahwah effect to the selected audio', which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly identifies the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling effects like effect_phaser or effect_tremolo.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where the wahwah effect is appropriate, leaving the agent without decision support.

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