insert_audio_item

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clarifies the relationship between start_time and start_measure and their formats, but does not disclose what happens if both or neither are provided, nor mention file format validation or failure modes. This is a moderate but incomplete disclosure.

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 concise and well-structured: a single-sentence purpose followed by a brief Args list. Every line adds valuable information; no fluff or repetition. It is appropriately front-loaded with the main action.

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 tool is relatively simple, and the description covers purpose, parameters, and some behavior. However, the mutually exclusive nature of start_time/start_measure is only implied, not explicitly stated, and the default behavior when both are omitted is missing. Given no annotations, these gaps leave the description slightly incomplete for an agent.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 0%, the description's Args section explicitly defines all four parameters, including units for start_time ('seconds') and the exact format for start_measure ('measure:beat,fraction'). It also explains optionality conditions, adding significant meaning beyond the bare 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 uses a specific verb 'Insert' with a clear resource ('audio file as a media item') and target ('on a track'). This distinctly separates it from siblings like create_midi_item, which handles MIDI instead of audio.

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 usage context is implied by the resource type ('audio file'), which contrasts with MIDI-oriented siblings, but no explicit alternatives or exclusions are mentioned. It does provide parameter usage guidance (start_time vs start_measure optionality), but not tool-selection guidance.

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