reaper_run_action

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

Description echoes annotations by mentioning destructive hint and adds context about arbitrary actions. However, annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and openWorldHint, so the description adds minimal new behavioral insight beyond confirming the annotation.

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 four short, front-loaded sentences. Every sentence serves a distinct purpose: purpose statement, use-case, lookup instructions, and warning. 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?

For a single-parameter tool with thorough annotations and a clear escape-hatch role, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter sourcing, and safety. No output schema exists but not needed given simplicity. A minor gap: it could mention whether the action's result is observed elsewhere, but not essential.

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 describes command_id as numeric ID from Actions list; description reinforces with explicit lookup steps (right-click → copy). With 100% schema coverage, the description adds extra practical guidance on obtaining the ID value, elevating it above baseline.

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?

Description clearly states 'Trigger any Reaper action by numeric command ID' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like reaper_add_marker and reaper_transport_play by framing this as a generic escape hatch for unwrapped actions.

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?

Description explicitly says 'escape hatch for actions not yet wrapped as dedicated tools' and provides lookup instructions for command IDs. It also warns about the destructive nature, giving clear when-to-use guidance.

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