mcp_opendaw_get_project_duration

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

Annotations already mark the tool as readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that the tool returns duration in beats and seconds or an error, but does not disclose additional behavioral aspects like side effects or cost. Given annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then detail the return format. Every word is necessary, earning a 5.

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 simple getter with an output schema and annotations, the description is quite complete. It explains what the duration represents and what units are returned. Could mention edge cases (e.g., no regions) but is otherwise sufficient.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and schema_description_coverage is 100%. The description has no need to explain parameters. Baseline score of 3 is correct as no additional meaning is required.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get the total project duration — the end position of the last region across all tracks.' It provides a specific verb (Get) and resource (total project duration), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_project_info' by focusing solely on duration.

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 implies when to use (when total duration is needed) but does not explicitly state usage context or list alternatives. With many sibling 'get_' tools, explicit guidance would improve clarity, but the purpose is self-explanatory.

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