delete_midi_note

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says 'delete' but discloses nothing about whether the deletion is undoable, whether the indices are 0- or 1-based, or whether remaining note indices shift after removal — critical for a destructive mutation whose parameters are index-based.

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?

A single short sentence with no waste, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise — the brevity comes at the cost of missing guidance and parameter context.

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?

A destructive mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and three completely undocumented parameters needs substantially more description than one sentence. An agent cannot confirm whether it needs to call get_midi_notes first or what the index base is.

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 0% across three required parameters. The description adds no meaning: it never explains what track_index/item_index/note_index refer to, whether they are zero-based, or whether note_index must reference an already fetched note. With a low-coverage schema, the description has to compensate and 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?

Clear specific verb+resource: deleting a MIDI note from an item. It is distinguishable from sibling delete tools (delete_take, delete_item, delete_envelope_point) by naming the MIDI-note resource, though it does not differentiate itself from set_midi_note or remove_overlapping_midi_notes beyond the verb.

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 offers no when-to-use context, no prerequisites (e.g., that the note must exist), and no comparison to alternatives such as clear_midi_item or remove_overlapping_midi_notes. It is purely a statement of effect.

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