set_clip_velocity_amount

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the effect on volume, but it does not disclose side effects, prerequisites (e.g., clip must exist), return values, validation behavior, or error conditions. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient 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 concise with two sentences and a structured Args block. It is front-loaded with the primary action, then provides context and parameter details without redundancy or unnecessary length.

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 setter, the description covers the basic meaning and effect, but it lacks usage context, prerequisites, and return behavior. The output schema exists (per context signals), but the description does not reference it or explain what the tool returns, leaving some ambiguity about the operation's outcome.

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 provides explicit parameter semantics: zero-based indexing for track_index and clip_index, and the 0.0-1.0 range for velocity_amount. Since schema description coverage is 0%, this fully compensates and adds meaning beyond the input schema, though the explanations are concise.

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: 'Set the velocity-to-volume amount for a clip.' The second sentence explains the effect ('Controls how much note velocity affects clip volume'), making it specific to this clip property and distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_clip_gain or set_clip_pitch.

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 implies use when wanting to control how note velocity affects volume, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. No mention of when not to use or how it compares to related clip settings.

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