get_notes_extended

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It correctly states this is a 'Read' operation and lists returned properties, but does not disclose potential errors, edge cases (e.g., non-MIDI clips), or any side effects. It is adequate but lacks deeper behavioral 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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a line listing return fields, and two brief parameter definitions. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary detail 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?

For a simple read tool with two params and an output schema, the description covers purpose, returned properties, and parameter semantics. It does not explicitly address when to use this vs. the similar get_notes_from_clip, but the name and content imply the distinction. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for typical usage.

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 only provides types and titles with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description compensates fully by explaining that track_index is 'Zero-based index of the track' and clip_index is 'Zero-based index of the clip slot,' giving precise meaning to both parameters.

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 clearly states 'Read all MIDI notes from a clip with extended properties,' which specifies the action (read) and resource (MIDI notes from a clip). It also distinguishes from sibling get_notes_from_clip by listing extended properties such as probability and release_velocity, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 indicates the tool reads extended note properties, which implies a use case when those properties are needed. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this instead of get_notes_from_clip, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The guidance is implicit rather than direct.

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