mcp_opendaw_set_transpose

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the operation is a view-only global transpose (no audio effect) and returns old/new values. However, it omits details like scope (affects all tracks?), reversibility, prerequisites, or side effects. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 three sentences: purpose, parameter explanation, return value. It is front-loaded and efficient. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more concise by combining the return info.

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 setter with one parameter and an existing output schema, this description covers the basics. However, it lacks context about the scope of the global setting (e.g., does it apply to the entire project or only the current track?), which would be helpful for an agent.

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 schema provides only the parameter name and type with no description. The tool description adds the valid range (-48 to +48) and explains the purpose ('Number of semitones to transpose'). This significantly enhances understanding beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Set' and resource 'global transpose for the piano roll view', and adds a clarifying note ('does not affect audio playback'). However, it does not distinguish from similar sibling tools like transpose_notes or diatonic_transpose_notes, which would help an agent choose the correct tool.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't explain that this is a global view setting, contrasting with per-note transposition. The agent is left to infer usage context from the name alone.

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