Scaffold a show

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation) and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable context: it creates a container with two specific components (master Null and tempo beat clock), and describes it as a 'blank canvas'. No contradictions with annotations; it appropriately discloses the creative nature and what is built.

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 one sentence plus a short phrase, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose, what it creates, and subsequent usage. Every word earns its place with no 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 optional parameters, no output schema), the description is complete: it explains the output (container with master Null and tempo clock) and provides next-step guidance. No additional behavioral or return value details are necessary.

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 50%: 'name' is documented in schema, 'parent_path' is not. The description does not add any parameter information beyond the schema, failing to clarify parent_path's role or format. For a 2-parameter tool with half coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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's purpose: creating a starting skeleton for a live show. It specifies the verb 'create' and the resource 'skeleton for a live show' with concrete elements (master Null, tempo beat clock). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_container by focusing on a show-specific scaffold.

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 implies the tool is a starting point for building a live show from scratch, suggesting subsequent steps ('then add scenes, audio features...'). While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, the context is clear enough for an agent to understand when to invoke it versus more specialized creation tools.

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