get_wwise_property_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds value by specifying the returned information (type, default, min/max, display name) and the prerequisite tool usage, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 well-structured with a clear opening sentence, usage guidance, and a parameter list. It is front-loaded with the most important information and avoids redundancy. The inclusion of 'Args:' and examples adds clarity without being overly verbose, though slightly longer than necessary.

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's complexity (5 parameters, 1 required, multiple identification methods) and lack of output schema, the description is fully complete. It explains return values, prerequisite steps, parameter selection, and provides examples, covering all aspects an agent needs to use the tool correctly.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates. It provides detailed descriptions of each parameter with examples (e.g., property_name: 'Volume', 'Pitch', object_path: '\Containers\Default Work Unit\Footstep', etc.) and clarifies that only one object identifier is needed, adding essential meaning beyond the schema.

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 gets detailed info about a specific property on a Wwise object, listing the returned attributes (type, min, max, default). It distinguishes from sibling tools by recommending use of get_property_and_reference_names first, establishing a clear purpose and differentiation.

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 explicitly guides the agent to first use get_property_and_reference_names to discover valid property names, and to use this tool to validate values before calling setProperty. It also explains the alternative object identification methods, providing clear context for when and how to use this tool.

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