track_resample

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states the operation but does not say whether resampling is destructive, whether undo is available, whether all selected tracks are modified permanently, or what happens if no tracks are selected. This is a noticeable transparency gap 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?

The description is short, front-loaded with the operation, and includes the prerequisite and parameter details in a clean Args block. Every sentence provides necessary information without padding.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the operation, the required selection precondition, and the parameter semantics. It is slightly incomplete only in not addressing the operation's side effects or failure cases, but it is otherwise sufficient for an agent to invoke 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%, but the description fully documents the only parameter: rate is the target sample rate in Hz, with examples and an explicit valid range (1-384000). This adds essential meaning beyond the schema's bare integer type and title.

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 a specific action ('Resample'), a clear resource ('the selected track(s)'), and the target result ('to a new sample rate'). It also names the required precondition via select_tracks, which disambiguates it from track/clip editing siblings that operate on other properties.

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 tells the agent to select tracks first with select_tracks before calling this tool. It provides clear context for when to use it, though it does not mention alternative 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.