generate_tone

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose what happens after generation (e.g., creates a new clip, replaces selection, requires a track). For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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?

Very concise: a one-line summary followed by a clear docstring listing parameters with defaults and ranges. 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?

Despite having 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the description omits crucial context: it doesn't explain whether the tone is inserted into a track, replaces a selection, or creates a new audio clip. This is a minimal viable description with clear gaps.

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?

The description adds range and option details not present in the schema (e.g., frequency 1-20000 Hz, waveform options including 'Square (no alias)'). The schema has 0% coverage, so description compensates well.

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 'Generate a tone signal' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling generation tools like generate_noise and generate_chirp by specifying it's a pure tone.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., generate_chirp, generate_dtmf). The description implies use for tone generation but does not mention prerequisites, selection requirements, or exclusions.

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