create_arrangement_audio_clip

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it states the basic action and parameter constraints, it does not disclose side effects, error behavior (e.g., what happens if the file doesn't exist or track is invalid), or whether the operation is reversible. This is a significant gap for a creation tool.

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 well-structured docstring with a clear intent and an Args section. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or unnecessary repetition. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

The tool is simple with three well-documented parameters, and an output schema exists (though not shown). However, given no annotations, the description lacks details on error conditions, side effects, and what the operation means for existing clips at the target position. It covers the mechanics but not the full context.

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 description explicitly documents all three parameters: track_index as zero-based and must be an audio track, file_path as an absolute path, and position in beats. This fully compensates for the schema having no descriptions, providing essential meaning beyond names and types.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('audio clip in the arrangement view') with a clear source ('from an audio file'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_arrangement_midi_clip and create_session_audio_clip, which differ by clip type or view.

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 provides clear context: it is for arrangement view audio clips and requires an audio track (stated in the track_index argument). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the context is sufficient for selection among siblings.

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