get_arrangement_clip_notes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the read-only nature ('Read all MIDI notes'), the exact return fields (pitch, start_time, duration, velocity, mute state, clip name and length), and the prerequisite call. It does not describe error cases, but for a read operation this is adequate.

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 concise and front-loaded, leading with the core action, then return values, then prerequisites, then parameters. Every sentence adds value, and the parameter bullet list is cleanly structured.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description clearly explains the return values and the necessary preliminary step. For a simple read tool with no annotations, it provides all the information an agent needs to select and invoke it correctly.

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 meaningful semantics for each parameter: track_index identifies the track, clip_index is tied to get_arrangement_clips, and user_prompt is explicitly for telemetry. This goes well beyond the bare schema definitions.

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 'Read all MIDI notes out of a clip placed in the Arrangement timeline,' using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_clip_notes by specifying the Arrangement timeline and mentioning get_arrangement_clips.

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?

It gives explicit prerequisite guidance: 'Use get_arrangement_clips first to find the clip's index.' This clearly indicates the required sequence of operations, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion cases.

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