select_device

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only says 'select', which is a state-changing UI operation, but it doesn't disclose side effects, prerequisites (e.g., valid track/device indices), or error behavior. For a tool that manipulates UI state, this is a significant gap.

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 extremely concise, with a one-line purpose statement and two parameter definitions. Every sentence earns its place, and the format is easily scannable with the Args section.

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 selection tool with an output schema (as indicated by context signals), the description covers the essential purpose and parameter semantics. It lacks information about expected behavior on invalid indices or whether it returns a confirmation, but given the output schema exists and the tool is relatively simple, the completeness is adequate.

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 defines both parameters with clear, meaningful semantics: 'Zero-based index of the track' and 'Zero-based index of the device in the track's device chain'. Since the schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage), this fully compensates and adds essential context (zero-based indexing).

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 the action ('Select') and the resource ('a device on a track in Ableton's UI'). This distinguishes it from other device-related tools like delete_device, set_device_parameter, and move_device, which have different verbs and purposes.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention related selection tools like get_selected_device or set_selected_track, nor does it provide context for when UI selection is needed. The simple 'select' purpose implies some usage, but explicit guidance is absent.

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