add_bus_effect

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Add effect' without mentioning side effects, prerequisites, reversibility, or impact on the bus layout. For a mutation operation, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, concise sentence with no irrelevant or redundant content. It is efficient, though it sacrifices impactful context. As a result, it is appropriately sized for a simple statement of purpose, but could be more useful with additional detail.

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 tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. It lacks usage guidance, behavioral details, and parameter clarification. This is insufficient for an agent to confidently understand the tool's full context and requirements.

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 adds no meaning beyond the input schema. Schema coverage is 75% (moderate), and the description does not compensate for the undocumented layout_path parameter. The existing schema descriptions are also minimal, and the description provides no additional explanatory value.

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 action 'Add' and the target 'effect to audio bus.' This distinguishes it from siblings like add_audio_bus (which adds a bus) and set_bus_volume (which sets volume). The specific verb+resource combination unambiguously conveys the tool's function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_audio_bus or create_audio_bus_layout. There is no context for selecting this over related tools, nor any exclusions or conditions for use.

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