Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• scene_transition_musicA
  3.6/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description discloses use of AI for analysis and dynamic energy levels, but fails to mention whether it modifies existing audio, return format, or potential latency. Limited behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences with clear front-loading of purpose. No unnecessary words. Efficient and to the point.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Despite having no output schema, the description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., audio file, URL). Lacks details on side effects, synchronization, or integration with game engine. Incomplete for an agent to fully understand impact.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Input schema covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no new parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states the tool generates transition music between game scenes, specifying the use of DeepSeek for emotional analysis. It distinguishes itself from siblings like generate_bgm by focusing on scene transitions.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies use for scene transitions but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives like generate_bgm or adaptive_layer_control. No exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios are provided.

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

• adaptive_layer_controlA
  3.9/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool creates separate audio files for real-time mixing, but does not mention output details, potential side effects, or error conditions.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description does not specify how results are returned (e.g., file paths or links) and omits dependencies like requiring a share_link from generate_bgm. Given no output schema, more detail on the output format would improve completeness.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by explaining that each selected layer creates a version with other layers muted, clarifying the enum behavior.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: generating multiple versions of a track with different stems muted for adaptive game audio. It distinguishes from siblings like generate_bgm (initial generation) and get_bgm_variations (retrieving existing variations).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for adaptive game audio but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. It provides context but lacks explicit guidance.

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

• get_bgm_variationsA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It mentions generating a variation but does not explicitly state whether the original is modified, whether it is a read-only operation, or any side effects. The description is adequate but not exhaustive.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is concise, with two sentences. The first states the tool's purpose, and the second explains the two variation types. No wasted words; front-loaded with key information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool has 5 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description adequately covers the two variation modes and their usage. It could mention that length is only for similar and energy_preset/mute_stems only for customize, but the schema already does that. Overall, it is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond schema: it restates the two variation types and their purpose. It does not provide additional semantic details for parameters such as length, energy_preset, or mute_stems beyond what the schema already conveys.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool generates a variation of an existing BGM using Soundraw, and it distinguishes between two specific variation types ('similar' and 'customize'). This verb+resource description is specific and differentiates from sibling tools like generate_bgm which creates from scratch.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides clear context for when to use each variation type: 'similar' for creating a new song with similar style, 'customize' for adjusting energy or muting stems. It does not explicitly say when not to use this tool (e.g., vs. generate_bgm), but the purpose implicitly guides the agent.

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

• generate_bgmA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the internal pipeline (DeepSeek analysis, Soundraw API mapping), returns (audio URL, share link, integration code), and the generation process. This provides meaningful transparency beyond a simple 'generate music' statement, though cost or external dependencies are not mentioned.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three sentences: purpose, process, outputs. It is front-loaded with the core action and contains no extraneous information. Every sentence earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema, the description adequately covers returns. All 7 parameters have schema descriptions. However, missing context about prerequisites (authentication, account), limits, or side effects. Sibling tool integration is not addressed.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how parameters are used (DeepSeek maps scene to Soundraw params) and listing return fields not in schema. This enriches understanding beyond the schema alone.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool generates background music for a game scene, naming a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_bgm_variations (which gets existing variations) and scene_transition_music (for transitions) by focusing on generating new music.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies use for generating background music but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_bgm_variations or scene_transition_music. No context on prerequisites or conditions is provided.

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