add_notes_to_clip

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. However, it does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether notes are added to existing notes or overwrite them, or if there are constraints on pitch or timing values. The description only states what the tool does without additional behavioral context.

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 a single sentence followed by a bullet list of parameters, which is reasonably structured. However, it could be more concise by moving parameter details to the schema, and some of the parameter descriptions could be more terse.

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 has 3 required parameters and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not cover edge cases (e.g., invalid note data) or explain the return value (though an output schema exists). The description lacks details on behavior when notes already exist or when the clip is not a MIDI clip.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by listing parameters and briefly explaining their roles (e.g., 'notes: List of note dictionaries, each with pitch, start_time, duration, velocity, and mute'). This adds meaning beyond the schema, but the description is not exhaustive (e.g., no default values, no constraints).

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 action ('Add MIDI notes to a clip') and the resource ('clip'). It is a specific verb-noun pair that distinguishes the tool from other clip-related tools like 'get_clip_notes' or 'update_notes', though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'update_notes' or 'remove_notes_in_range'). It does not mention prerequisites or conditions under which the tool should or should not be invoked.

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