screenstudio_music

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

Annotations declare write/mutating (readOnlyHint=false) with destructiveHint=false, so the description is not the sole carrier of safety info. It adds genuine behavioral context: fade-in/out is applied, ducking is transcript-driven, and if narration exists the music is mixed under rather than replacing it. It stops short of stating whether an existing background track is overwritten or permissions needed.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action. The narration parenthetical is slightly redundant but adds the mechanism insight needed to avoid misreading dedup behavior.

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?

Mutation tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage; the description supplies the behavioral mechanics (fading, transcript-driven ducking, mix-vs-replace). The main gap is absence of detail on the track identifier format and volume/duckTo semantics, which are the only parameters with defaults.

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% for 5 parameters, so the description must compensate. It explains duckUnderSpeech (dips while anyone speaks, sourced from the transcript) but leaves track, duckTo, volume, and projectPath entirely unexplained beyond their names and JSON type/defaults.

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?

States a specific verb (lay a track under the edited video) and resource (Screen Studio's music library), plus fade behavior. No sibling tool in the list does music-bedding, and the description names the related narration music option to distinguish the mechanism.

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?

Implies the use case (backing music under an edited video) and notes the narration relationship, but gives no explicit when-to-use versus screenstudio_narrate's music option, no prerequisites, and no statement of when this tool is the wrong choice.

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