click_removal

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden and successfully notes the scope constraint ('selected audio'), implying selection is required. However, it lacks disclosure of mutation characteristics (whether destructive/modifying in-place), undo behavior, or return values, which are important for an audio processing tool.

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 optimally structured with a single clear purpose sentence followed by an Args block. Every element earns its place; there is no redundant or extraneous text while maintaining complete parameter documentation.

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 low complexity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description provides adequate coverage of purpose, example use case, and parameter details. It lacks only explicit notes on the destructive nature of the operation or return behavior to be fully complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing comprehensive semantics for both parameters: valid ranges (0-900, 0-40), units (samples), directional effects ('Higher = fewer clicks removed'), and default values (200, 20).

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 specific action ('Remove clicks and pops') and target ('selected audio'), with the parenthetical example '(e.g. vinyl recordings)' effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like noise_reduction or effect_repair by indicating the specific type of audio artifact it addresses.

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 example 'vinyl recordings' provides implicit contextual guidance for when to use this tool, but there are no explicit guidelines comparing it to alternatives (e.g., when to use noise_reduction vs click_removal) or prerequisites beyond the 'selected audio' reference.

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