broadcast_spatial_audio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that audio is spatialized via WebAudio PannerNode and accepts mp3/wav formats. However, it omits behavioral details such as whether audio replaces existing sounds, limits on concurrent playback, volume control, error handling, or response 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 two sentences long: the first states the purpose, the second details usage and technical context. There is no extraneous information; every sentence contributes meaningful guidance.

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 5 parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the core usage (URL and coordinates) but lacks information on prerequisites, error scenarios, or what the tool returns beyond the schema. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'prompt_or_url' (URL to audio file, supported formats) and implies x,y,z specify 3D coordinates. It does not describe 'is_loop' or defaults. The additions are helpful but not comprehensive for all parameters.

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 broadcasts spatial audio (music/ambience) to the scene, specifying the verb 'broadcast' and the resource 'spatial audio'. It distinguishes from the sibling 'broadcast_spatial_notification' by focusing on audio playback and spatialization. However, it does not explicitly contrast with the notification tool, preventing a perfect score.

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 that the tool is used to play audio files at 3D coordinates via a URL, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like 'broadcast_spatial_notification'. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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