Removes a MIDI FX slot from a track, shifts later slots down, and supports undo.
Remove one MIDI FX slot; later slots move down. Undoable.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slot | Yes | 0-based clip slot (scene row) on the track. | |
| track | Yes | Track id (UUID string from tracks.list, stable) or 0-based index (shifts when tracks are added or moved). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructive=true and idempotent=false, but the description adds two facts the annotations cannot express: subsequent slots shift down (index renumbering side effect) and the operation is undoable. That is exactly the extra context an agent needs before a destructive call.
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?
Two short clauses, no filler, with the reindexing consequence front-loaded before the undo note.
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 two-parameter destructive mutation, the description covers reversibility and post-state effects, which is the critical information. Only the discovery path for the slot index 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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so track and slot semantics are already documented, and the description adds nothing about them. It also does not resolve the schema's confusing 'clip slot (scene row)' wording for a MIDI FX slot index.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Remove one MIDI FX slot') that clearly separates it from devices_remove and mixer_remove_return, though it never names those siblings to make the distinction explicit.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no pointer to midi_fx_list for discovering valid slot indices. Usage is only loosely implied by the verb.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.