browse_for_role

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It details scoring (Instrument Racks > Device Presets > bare devices > raw samples), filtering of one-shot junk and FX-only items, and best-first sorting.

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?

Description is concise with no redundancy. Uses bullet points for roles and clear explanation of scoring. Every sentence adds value.

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?

While no output schema, the description explains scoring and sorting, but could briefly mention the output format (e.g., list of candidate names or paths). Still, it provides sufficient context for the tool's purpose.

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 description adds full meaning by listing allowed roles for 'role' and explaining 'max_results' controls number of results. This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool walks Ableton's browser for instruments suited to a specific role and returns quality-ranked candidates. It distinguishes from siblings like search_browser by specifying the role-based selection.

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 explicitly says to use this when you don't know what's in the user's library and want a quick menu of options for a given track role. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the context of sibling tools suggests alternatives.

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