project_export_audio

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the export behavior and adds essential constraints like mandatory path announcement, prohibition on home-folder saves, and acceptable locations. However, it does not mention whether files are overwritten or what the return value is, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 well-structured with purpose first, then critical mandatory instructions, acceptable locations, and parameter details. While somewhat long, every sentence carries essential operational information, and the use of bold headings and lists aids readability.

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?

For a two-parameter export tool, the description covers the main functionality, path rules, and parameter semantics thoroughly. It lacks explicit return value/error handling details and does not state overwrite behavior, but the provided guidance is sufficient for simple export tasks. No output schema exists, so some return information would improve completeness.

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 Args section explicitly describes both parameters: path as the absolute path with extension determining format (wav, mp3, ogg, flac, aiff), and num_channels with default 2 and clarification (1=mono, 2=stereo). This fully compensates for the schema having no property descriptions.

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 tool exports project audio to a file, with format determined by file extension. This specific verb+resource distinguishes it from siblings like project_export_labels and project_import_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?

It provides clear operational context: mandatory user notification before export, never save to home folder, and accept only specified subfolders. It also references calling get_default_export_folder as an alternative when no path is given, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other export tools.

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