capture_midi

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral details itself, but it only states the core action. It does not mention where the clip is created (e.g., selected track/slot), whether existing clips are overwritten, permissions needed, or undo/recording context.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that uses precise wording. Every word earns its place, with no filler or repetition.

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?

Given there are no parameters, the description is minimally viable, but gaps remain: it does not clarify which track or clip slot receives the new clip, whether captured notes must exist, or how the tool behaves in different session/arrangement contexts. An output schema exists but is not described, so the description still carries the burden of explaining the operation's scope.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The description sufficiently covers the action with 'recently played MIDI notes' and 'a new clip'; the baseline of 4 applies for a no-parameter tool.

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 ('Capture') and resource ('recently played MIDI notes') with a clear destination ('into a new clip'). This distinguishes it from siblings like capture_and_insert_scene, which implies a different target, and from create_clip/add_notes_to_clip, which are more generic.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as capture_and_insert_scene or add_notes_to_clip. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., recent MIDI input) or exclusions.

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