mcp_opendaw_move_audio_unit

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

With no annotations, description adds value by explaining internal method (AudioUnitBoxAdapter.move), delta semantics, and return type. Does not explicitly state that it modifies project state (destructive), but move operations are inherently modifying.

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?

Three short purposeful sentences plus parameter definitions. Front-loaded purpose, efficient structure.

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 core behavior, parameter constraints, and return value. Simple tool with output schema present. Could mention mutability but not necessary for clarity.

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 explains both parameters: unit_index as current index and delta as relative move with allowed values -1/+1. This provides crucial meaning beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states verb 'move' and resource 'audio unit' in mixer order, distinguishing from sibling move tools like move_effect and move_track. Also provides implementation detail and group scope.

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?

Purpose is clear but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives like rename or delete. Only implied usage for reordering within type groups.

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