generate_tone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core behavior (fills the selected time range) and parameter defaults, but doesn't state whether existing audio is overwritten, which track gets the tone, or whether the operation is undoable. This is a moderate gap for a tool that modifies project content.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-sentence behavior statement with a prerequisite, followed by a cleanly formatted Args list. Every line adds information and there is no redundant text.

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 simple 3-parameter generator with no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation context: selected-range dependency and parameter constraints. It could mention required track selection or the effect on existing audio, but the core usage is clear enough for an agent to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the Args block is the only source of parameter meaning. The description fully compensates by listing valid waveform values, frequency minimum, amplitude range, and defaults for all three parameters.

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 states 'Generate a tone' with a clear verb and resource, and adds scoping detail by saying it fills the currently selected time range. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling generators like generate_chirp or generate_noise, but the waveform/frequency/amplitude parameters make the intent sufficiently distinct.

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 description explicitly instructs the agent to call select_region first to control duration, giving a concrete prerequisite and usage context. It doesn't mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but for a simple generator this is clear enough guidance.

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