mcp_opendaw_set_midi_effect_param

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns old and new values, which is helpful, but omits any other behavioral traits such as side effects, error handling, or permissions.

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 short and directly organized as a bullet list of parameters. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy.

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 5 parameters, no schema descriptions, and the existence of an output schema, the description covers parameter semantics and return values well. It lacks prerequisite or error context, but is fairly complete for a setter 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 description coverage is 0%, but the description explicitly lists all 5 parameters with concise explanations, including examples for param_name and the -1 convention for param_index. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare 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?

Description explicitly states 'Set a parameter on a MIDI effect', which is a clear verb+resource combination. The name and description directly differentiate it from sibling tools like set_effect_parameter (for audio effects) and set_instrument_param.

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 usage for MIDI effects by naming the tool accordingly, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., set_effect_parameter for audio effects) or when not to use it.

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