setup_vocal_chain

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It details the processing chain and bus creation/reuse, but does not mention if the operation is reversible, what happens on error, or performance impact. The description is transparent enough for typical use but lacks edge-case disclosure.

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?

Description is well-structured with a summary sentence, a numbered list of processing steps, and a parameter list. While a bit lengthy, each part adds value. Minor redundancy with parameter list duplicates schema info, but overall efficient.

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 complexity (9 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description covers the main behavior thoroughly: chain order, default EQ/comp settings, bus creation/reuse. Lacks details on return value or conflict handling, but adequate for expected usage.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description adds significant context by explaining each parameter's role in the processing chain (e.g., 'HP filter at hp_freq', 'Mud cut: -2dB at 250Hz'). It also mentions default values for several parameters, aiding selection beyond schema titles.

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 it's a 'one-call vocal-chain setup' with a specific list of processing steps (HP filter, mud cut, presence boost, etc.) and mentions creating a plate reverb bus. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like fx_add or send_create which are lower-level.

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 says 'Designed to give a polished broadcast-ready vocal with one call,' implying when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with alternatives like manual chain setup or other setup tools (e.g., setup_parallel_compression). Guidance is implied but not explicit.

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