place_bb_clip

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully explains that placing the clip triggers the BB pattern at the given time and that the default length is one 16-step BB cycle. However, it does not disclose side effects such as overwriting existing clips, whether placement is reversible, or other mutation consequences.

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 compact: two short sentences and a focused Args list with no filler or redundancy. The core purpose is front-loaded, and every line contributes useful information.

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 simple 3-parameter tool with an indicated output schema, the description covers the action, prerequisites, parameter semantics, and the BB-pattern relationship. It is complete enough for an agent to call the tool correctly, though it could optionally mention how this differs from place_pattern.

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%, but the Args block compensates by defining bb_track_index, pos_bars in bars, and length_bars with the BB-cycle default meaning. This adds real semantic value beyond the raw schema properties.

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 opening sentence states a concrete action ('Place...') and a specific resource ('beat/bassline clip on a pattern track'), which is clear and unambiguous. It establishes BB-pattern specificity but does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like place_pattern or place_sample_clip.

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 gives a useful prerequisite: the BB pattern should be created via add_pattern_track and filled with notes. This tells the agent when the tool is appropriate, though it does not provide explicit exclusions or direct comparisons to sibling placement tools.

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