raw_show_clipping

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden and does warn that the action may open a dialog or change project state. The word 'toggle' also signals a state change, and the caution to inspect the command name first adds useful side-effect awareness.

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 compact and front-loads the core behavior before the side-effect caveat. The leading 'ShowClipping:' label is somewhat redundant with the tool name, and 'inspect the command name first' is terse, but there is no meaningful waste.

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 no-argument command, it covers the essentials: purpose, invocation, and possible side effects. However, the instruction to 'inspect the command name first' is unexplained, and the exact consequences of the toggle are left vague.

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 tool has zero parameters, the input schema is an empty object, and the description explicitly labels it as a no-argument action. There is no parameter ambiguity to resolve.

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?

States a specific action and resource: toggles the display of clipping in the waveform. The wording is specific enough to distinguish it from related siblings like analyze_find_clipping, which detect clipping rather than show/hide a visual overlay.

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 purpose implies when to use it — when the user wants to toggle clipping visibility — and it explicitly says the action takes no arguments. However, it does not name alternatives or explain when not to use it versus related commands such as analyze_find_clipping or raw_toggle.

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