trim_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 states the tool 'trims' audio, implying mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether it modifies the original file, requires specific permissions, handles errors, or has performance constraints like file size limits. The description is minimal and lacks critical operational context.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and earns its place by clearly conveying the core functionality.

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 complexity of a mutation tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavior, error handling, output specifics, or usage context, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand how to invoke it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with all parameters well-documented in the schema (e.g., paths, time formats, output format). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining parameter interactions (e.g., using 'duration' vs. 'endTime') or default behaviors. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('trim') and resource ('audio file') with a specific purpose ('to a specific duration'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'trim_video' by specifying audio rather than video, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'extract_audio' which might also involve segmenting audio files.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose 'trim_audio' over 'extract_audio' or other audio/video processing siblings, nor does it specify prerequisites like file formats or system requirements.

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