Apply a compression intent

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

The description discloses key behaviors not captured by annotations: it always sets ratio and threshold together, treats the parameters as a single rollback unit, and details the level_aware logic with fallback. This adds significant value beyond the annotations which only indicate non-destructive, non-idempotent behavior.

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 three sentences that front-load the main action and key constraints. It could be slightly more structured but efficiently conveys the essential behavior without fluff.

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 has 5 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the return value, the rollback behavior, and the level_aware logic. It is mostly complete but could clarify the intensity parameter's role and the indexing of tracks.

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 60% schema parameter coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining that slot is for specific plugins, intent determines a preset of parameters, and level_aware adjusts threshold based on measured level. However, it does not clarify the effect of intensity or track index semantics, leaving some gaps.

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 it compresses via specific plugins (Fruity Limiter or FabFilter Pro-C) and that it sets ratio and threshold together per intent. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on compression, which is a distinct effect from delay, EQ, reverb, etc.

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 explains when level_aware is used and the behavior when the track is playing vs stopped, which provides context for usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it, lacking exclusions.

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