sampler_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the field list: it does not say what happens if the slot is empty, if no Sampler device exists, or how slice data is ordered or bounded.

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?

One dense sentence that front-loads the resource and then enumerates returned fields, including units (seconds) for slice start/end. No filler, though the lack of an explicit verb makes the opening slightly ambiguous.

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 no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so well by listing every field and clarifying sample-slice semantics (index, triggering note, start/end in seconds). It falls short only on error/edge-case behavior for clips without a Sampler.

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%; track and slot are fully documented in the schema (UUID vs shifting index, 0-based slot). The description mentions the clip only implicitly and adds nothing about parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 precisely what is returned for a given clip's sampler (file, length, root note, transpose, envelope, slices), which makes the retrieval purpose clear. But it is a bare noun phrase with no verb and gives no differentiation from sibling readers like devices_get, params_list, or sampler_set.

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 on when to call this versus sampler_set, sampler_slice, clips_write_slices, or devices_get, and no stated precondition (e.g. that the slot must hold an audio clip with a Sampler device). The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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