mcp_opendaw_delete_section

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds that the tool scans all tracks and audio units, deletes overlapping regions, and returns per-track details. This provides useful context beyond the annotation.

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 relatively long but well-structured with summary, explanation, parameter list, and examples. Slight redundancy (e.g., 'across all tracks' repeated) but not excessive.

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 complexity of deleting across tracks, the description covers the operation, parameters, return values (number deleted, per-track details, remaining counts), and provides examples. No output schema exists, so description compensates effectively.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains each parameter in plain language: from_beat (start), to_beat (exclusive end), unit_indices (comma-separated, default all). Examples further clarify usage.

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 states exactly what the tool does: delete all regions overlapping a beat range across all tracks. It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'delete_region' by emphasizing batch deletion across tracks.

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 explicit usage scenarios ('clear bars 9-12', 'remove the intro') and notes it replaces multiple delete_region calls. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is clear and helpful.

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