ustx_summary

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. 'Summary of' implies a non-destructive read and the parenthetical discloses what the result contains (tempos, tracks, voice parts), but it says nothing about whether the path must point to an existing/valid .ustx file, error behavior, or result shape beyond the field list.

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?

Front-loaded and very short; the English sentence plus its Japanese rendering stay on one line. The bilingual duplication is conventional for localization and costs little, though it adds no information for a single-language agent.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description must cover return content and preconditions; it hints at the return content but omits path requirements and failure modes. For a simple one-parameter read tool this is adequate but not thorough.

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?

One required parameter (path) with 0% schema description coverage; the schema offers only the title 'Path'. The description compensates partially by tying the path to a .ustx file, but does not state whether it must be absolute, must already exist, or can point to an open project.

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?

Names the resource (.ustx file) and the operation (summary), and enumerates what the summary covers — tempos, tracks, voice parts. That is enough to distinguish it from action siblings like ustx_add_track or ustx_set_tempo, though it does not explicitly contrast with the closer ustx_list_notes or get_project.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative. An agent must infer on its own that this is the inspection tool to call before editing, versus listing notes or opening a project.

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