set_selected_scene

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states the action ('Set the selected scene') without explaining side effects, whether the scene is launched, or any session state changes. This is a minimal operation, but additional context (e.g., 'does not trigger playback') would improve transparency.

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 two sentences and to the point, front-loading the tool's purpose and then documenting the parameter. No wasted words, well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains what to pass and what the action is. However, it could briefly differentiate itself from fire_scene (which triggers a scene) to fully round out the selection context, slightly limiting completeness.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by clearly explaining the parameter: 'Zero-based index of the scene to select.' This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's bare 'Scene Index' title, which is valuable for correct usage.

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 ('Set') with a resource ('selected scene in Ableton Live'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_selected_scene (get vs set) and fire_scene (select vs trigger). It is unambiguous and immediately understandable.

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 a straightforward use case—changing the current selection—but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like fire_scene or get_selected_scene. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or selection implications.

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