set_project_key

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: 'Does not touch Live unless tempo is given', and explains that genre affects generator defaults. It adds meaningful context about state and side effects, though it does not discuss validation or reversibility.

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 logically structured: a clear one-line summary, a context paragraph explaining its role, and a bulleted parameter list. Every sentence provides useful 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?

The tool has five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description covers purpose, side effects, parameter semantics, and usage context, making it sufficient for correct selection and invocation. A mention of return value or explicit alternative for tempo-only changes would improve it, but these are minor gaps.

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 fully compensates by explaining every parameter: tonic with examples, mode with scale examples, tempo condition, genre purpose, and user_prompt for telemetry. This adds substantial meaning beyond the raw 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 states 'Set the project's tonal center (key/mode), and optionally tempo and genre' with a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling generators by positioning set_project_key as the foundational state-setting 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?

It explains that this is the foundation for chord/bass/drum generators and snap_to_scale, indicating when to use it before those tools. It also clarifies 'Does not touch Live unless tempo is given', providing context for side effects, though it does not explicitly name alternatives like set_tempo.

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