wave_mark_highlight

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

No annotations are provided to indicate read-only or destructive behavior. The description implies a mutation (marking a highlight) but does not disclose side effects, undoability, or whether the stream must be active. The full burden falls on the description, which is insufficient.

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, clear sentence with no fluff. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The description covers the basic action but lacks context on error conditions, prerequisites (e.g., stream must be active), and how the highlight relates to later clipping. Given the simple schema and no output schema, it is minimally adequate.

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 covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'Mark a moment', so it meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 (mark), resource (a moment in a stream), and purpose (as a highlight for later clipping). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like wave_create_clip, which creates a clip directly, and wave_start_stream, which initiates a stream.

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. For example, it doesn't specify that the stream must be live or that this is a prerequisite for clipping. Siblings include wave_create_clip, but the relationship is not explained.

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