select_zero_crossing

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It successfully explains the acoustic benefit (preventing clicks) and implies this modifies selection state not audio data. However, it omits safety details (reversibility), failure modes (what if no zero crossing exists?), or whether it requires an existing selection.

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 with zero waste: first states the action, second provides usage context. Information is front-loaded and every sentence 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?

For a zero-parameter selection utility with no output schema, the description adequately covers the essential what and why. It could be improved by explicitly stating prerequisites (requires existing selection) but is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Tool has zero parameters. Per evaluation rules, 0 parameters establishes a baseline score of 4. The description appropriately requires no additional parameter clarification.

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 specific action verb 'Adjust' with clear resource 'current selection boundaries' and mechanism 'nearest zero crossings'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling selection tools (select_all, select_region, etc.) by specifying the zero-crossing behavior rather than just selecting content.

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 explicit contextual guidance: 'Useful before cuts to avoid audible clicks at edit points.' This tells the agent exactly when to invoke the tool (prior to cut operations) and the benefit (preventing clicks), though it does not explicitly name alternative selection tools or when not to use it.

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