effect_invert

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 that the operation applies to 'selected audio' (indicating a selection prerequisite), but omits whether the operation is destructive, reversible, or has side effects on audio quality. Adequate but minimal behavioral disclosure for a mutation 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?

Two sentences, zero waste. The first defines the operation, the second provides the use case. No redundant words or generic filler. Front-loaded with the action verb and precisely scoped to 'selected audio'.

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 tool's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is appropriately complete. It explains what the tool does and why to use it. A perfect 5 would require acknowledging destructiveness or undo behavior, but this is sufficient for agent selection and invocation.

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 contains zero parameters, which per guidelines establishes a baseline of 4. The description appropriately does not invent parameters, and the mention of 'selected audio' correctly implies the operation scope without contradicting the empty parameter 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 provides a specific verb ('Invert'/'flip phase') and resource ('selected audio'), clearly distinguishing this from siblings like 'effect_reverse' (time reversal) or 'effect_amplify' (volume change). The parenthetical clarification '(flip phase)' precisely defines the operation.

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 second sentence provides explicit usage guidance ('Useful for phase cancellation'), indicating the primary scenario for selecting this tool over other effects. While it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it, the specific use case effectively guides selection among the numerous audio effect siblings.

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