measure_loudness

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, requires specific file formats, or modifies the files. With no annotations present, the description carries full burden but provides minimal insight into side effects or constraints.

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 very short and concise, consisting of a single sentence. However, it is too brief and lacks structure (e.g., no bullet points or separation of concerns), which might leave the agent without enough context.

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 that there is no output schema, no annotations, and only one parameter, the description should provide more context about what is returned or how the measurement is performed. It is incomplete and assumes the agent already knows the details of EBU R128.

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?

The input schema has one parameter 'paths' with 0% description coverage. The description only adds 'per file', which is insufficient to clarify what paths refer to (e.g., audio files, directories) or any constraints like supported formats. The schema provides no additional help.

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 measures EBU R128 integrated LUFS, loudness range, and true peak per file. It uses a specific verb 'measure' and specific resource (audio loudness metrics), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like mix_plan or probe_media which have different purposes.

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, nor are there any prerequisites or exclusions mentioned. The description simply states what it does without indicating appropriate contexts.

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