effect_change_pitch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait (tempo preservation) but omits mutation details, selection requirements, and error conditions (e.g., what happens if no audio is selected).

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?

Extremely efficient two-sentence structure: first sentence states purpose and key constraint, second documents the parameter. No redundant information; every word earns its place.

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?

Adequate for a single-parameter effect tool with no output schema. Covers the essential operation and parameter semantics. Minor gap: does not confirm whether the effect applies to the current selection or entire project, though 'selected audio' implies selection context.

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 schema has 0% description coverage (only title 'Semitones'). The description adds critical semantic meaning: the unit (semitones), directionality (negative=lower, positive=higher), and type of value (number to shift). Fully compensates for schema deficiency.

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 ('Change') with clear resource ('pitch of the selected audio') and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools via 'without changing tempo', differentiating it from effect_change_tempo and effect_change_speed.

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?

Provides clear behavioral context ('without changing tempo') that implicitly guides selection vs tempo-changing alternatives, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state prerequisites like requiring an audio selection.

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