send_cue

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the OSC cue sending behavior, path requirement, and how the value parameter is cast based on type. Could mention error handling but not critical.

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?

Very concise: first sentence states purpose, second gives usage, then path rule and example, then args. No wasted words.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, and parameter semantics well. Output schema exists (not shown) so return values are likely documented. Could briefly mention no side effects, but overall complete for a simple send tool.

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% coverage, but description adds essential semantics: path must start with '/', value is optional with type-casting behavior (int/float native, else string). Fully compensates for schema gaps.

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 verb (Send), resource (OSC cue), and context (trigger sync point in Sonic Pi code). It distinguishes from sibling tools like mixer controls or pattern operations.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'trigger live_loops or one_shot blocks waiting on sync.' Provides path format requirement and example. No exclusion of alternatives, but context is clear.

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