clips_write_slices

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

Annotations already declare non-readonly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description usefully adds that the operation replaces existing notes and is undoable. That clarifies the mutation’s effect beyond the structured hints, though it does not cover permissions or return behavior.

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 front-loaded and fits into one long sentence with no irrelevant material, though the examples make it slightly denser than strictly necessary.

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 a fully described schema and annotations covering safety/idempotency, the description supplies the critical replacement and undoability context. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly, though it could mention the relationship to slicing tools like sampler_slice.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents slice, start, duration, velocity, pitch, track, and slot. The description restates the key step fields but adds little syntax or meaning beyond the schema.

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: writing slice playback steps for a sliced audio clip, replacing its notes. It clearly distinguishes this from generic MIDI writing by tying the operation to slice indices and audio-clip slices.

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?

It provides implied usage context—melodic single-slice playback versus rearranged breaks with many slices—but never explicitly says when to use this instead of siblings like clips_write_midi or clips_transform.

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