track_get_all

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses a behavioral limit: sample_filenames is capped at 20 distinct names per track and is empty if no audio items. This adds transparency beyond a simple listing of properties.

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 concise: two sentences and a note. It front-loads the purpose, then adds necessary detail about sample_filenames. No redundant information.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return includes properties and sample_filenames behavior. However, it does not fully specify the structure (e.g., array of objects) or describe all properties beyond names. Adequate but incomplete.

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?

There are zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds value by detailing the output fields, especially the special sample_filenames field, which compensates for the lack of output schema.

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 the tool retrieves all tracks with specific properties (name, volume, pan, etc.), including a detailed explanation of the sample_filenames field. This directly distinguishes it from siblings like track_get_info (single track) or track_get_mixer_state.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like track_get_info or track_get_mixer_state. The description implies it is for bulk retrieval, but lacks when-not or context for choice.

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