select_track

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

The description discloses the exclusive behavior: 'If True, deselect other tracks first.' This adds useful context beyond the annotations. However, it does not mention what happens when exclusive is False, whether the operation is additive, or any behavior for invalid track indices. The destructiveHint=false annotation is not contradicted.

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 short and front-loaded with the core action. However, the 'Args:' section lists only exclusive, omitting track_index, which is structurally inconsistent with the schema. It is concise but slightly incomplete in structure.

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 tool with no output schema and minimal annotations, the description leaves important gaps: track_index is undocumented, there is no usage guidance relative to sibling selection tools, and no mention of return behavior or side effects beyond exclusive. The description is too thin to fully support correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It explains exclusive but completely omits track_index, which is the required parameter. The meaning of track_index is left to inference, and no details about indexing or bounds are provided.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Select a track.' This is clear and unambiguous about the core operation. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like select_all_tracks or unselect_all_tracks, so it falls short of a 5.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as select_all_tracks, unselect_all_tracks, or get_selected_tracks. The exclusive argument implies behavior around other tracks, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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