Create tempo sync

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

The description explains that emit_events broadcasts a beat event over WebSocket, providing behavioral context beyond annotations. It does not contradict annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds value by detailing channels and event broadcasting.

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 front-loaded with the core function and then details channels and pairing. It is slightly verbose but every sentence contributes meaningful guidance. No wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately explains the return values (channels, event). It suggests pairing with another tool, covering usage context. It lacks prerequisites but is sufficient for a self-contained tool.

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 coverage is 100% with all 4 parameters described. The description adds meaning by explaining how period affects ramp and bar channels and that expose_controls retunes the beat division on the fly, enriching the 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 that the tool creates a tempo clock driven by TouchDesigner's global tempo, exposing specific beat-synced channels (ramp, pulse, beat/bar counters, bpm) on a Null CHOP. This distinguishes it from siblings like create_audio_reactive or create_beat_grid_sequencer.

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 advises binding parameters to lock visuals to the beat and suggests pairing with extract_audio_features for full musical reactivity. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the specific function makes usage clear.

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