remove_audio_bus

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'Remove audio bus.' without disclosing that it modifies the bus layout, that removal may be permanent, or that removing the Master bus is disallowed.

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, easy to parse. However, it is so minimal that it provides no more information than the tool name, offering little structural benefit.

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 mutating operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description lacks necessary context about side effects, error conditions, and parameter relationships. It does not explain what happens if bus_index equals 0 or how layout_path selects the layout to modify.

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?

Description adds no parameter information beyond the schema. With only 50% schema coverage (bus_index documented, layout_path only has a default), the description could clarify layout_path's role and the master bus restriction, but does not.

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?

Description uses a specific verb+resource ('Remove audio bus.') making the core function clear. It differentiates from sibling tools like add_audio_bus and set_bus_volume, though it doesn't mention caveats like the master bus restriction.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like add_audio_bus or set_bus_volume. It lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., existing layout) or whether to use this vs editor_remove_node.

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