select_all_tracks

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

With no annotations, the description bears full behavioral burden. It does not disclose whether the selection replaces or adds to current selection, what gets selected (all tracks including master?), or any state changes. It only restates the obvious action.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action, though extremely brief.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse for a selection tool. It fails to convey the effect on existing selections, whether all track types are included, or any subsequent actions needed. Basic context is missing.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not applicable. Per the rubric, 0 params gives a baseline of 4; the description adds nothing but nothing is needed.

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 'Select all tracks' states a verb and resource, distinguishing it from unselect_all_tracks and select_track. However, it lacks any context about scope or effect, and with a title of null it provides only a minimum viable statement.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this versus select_track or unselect_all_tracks. The agent must infer that this is for bulk selection, but no explicit when/when-not or alternatives are given.

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