mcp_opendaw_list_midi_effect_params

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that the tool returns current values and provides the return structure (names, values, units, constraints), which is useful behavioral 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 four sentences with no unnecessary words. It frontloads the purpose, then explains parameters, then describes the return. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool has an output schema, the description correctly notes what is returned (names, values, units, constraints). It covers the purpose, parameters, and output, though it could mention prerequisites (e.g., the effect must exist).

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides clear explanations for both required parameters: 'unit_index: Audio unit index.' and 'effect_index: MIDI effect position in the chain (0-based).' This adds meaning beyond the raw integer types.

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 action ('list all parameters') and the resource ('a MIDI effect with current values'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'list_effect_parameters' (likely audio effects) and 'list_midi_effects' (list effects themselves).

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 explains the parameters and their roles, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. sibling list tools. Usage is implied by the tool name and parameter descriptions, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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