set_scene_tempo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: passing 0 or a negative value clears the tempo and the scene inherits the song tempo. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, though it doesn't mention edge cases like invalid scene_index.

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 and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a clear explanation of the clear behavior, and a bulleted args list. Every sentence provides necessary information without waste.

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 with only two parameters, the description covers the essential behavior: setting and clearing tempo. The output schema is present, so return values don't need explanation. It lacks edge-case error handling, but overall it's sufficiently complete for its complexity.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates. It clearly explains that scene_index is zero-based and tempo is in BPM or -1.0 to clear. This gives complete semantic meaning to both parameters, which the schema lacks.

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 'Set the tempo for a specific scene' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like set_tempo (song tempo) and set_scene_time_signature by focusing on scene tempo.

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 usage (when you need to set or clear a scene's tempo) and explains the clear behavior, but it does not explicitly mention when to use vs alternatives like set_tempo. No exclusions or alternatives are named, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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