sound_create

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 side effects, permissions, or side effects of creation. It only restates the tool's purpose without revealing what happens under the hood (e.g., whether the instrument appears in the project tree, persists, or has immediate effects).

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 extremely concise, using only one sentence and a compact Args block. Every element (the purpose clarification and the sound type list) adds value, and the format is front-loaded with the key action first.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 scalar parameters, no nested objects, no output schema), the description is mostly adequate: it explains the primary use case and provides the enum values. However, it omits any mention of return behavior, errors, or how the created sound is integrated, which could be important for an agent to properly chain calls.

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 description provides a list of allowed values for sound_type (SingleSound, MultiSound, etc.) that is not present in the schema, adding valuable semantics. However, it does not explain what each type means or clarify the 'name' parameter beyond its optionality, leaving gaps for an agent selecting arguments.

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 'Create a standalone instrument' with a specific verb and resource, and the parenthetical adds useful context about SingleSound and Multi playlists. It distinguishes the tool from other create-type siblings (e.g., vca_create, bank_create) by clarifying the resource type, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative tools are mentioned. The phrase 'usually a SingleSound for a Multi's playlist' gives a hint of intended usage, but there is no guidance on when not to use this tool or how it differs from creating sounds via other means (e.g., importing or duplicating).

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