set_arrangement_loop

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

With no annotations, the description only adds that parameters are in beats. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it toggles loop mode), requirements (playback state), or return value. Minimal transparency beyond the basic action.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word is necessary; no fluff. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and parameter detail.

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?

While the output schema exists (not shown), the description lacks context about the effect of setting the loop, such as whether it overrides previous loop settings, or the relationship to playback. Given two required parameters with no schema descriptions, more completeness is needed.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It specifies that 'start and length are in beats,' which provides units not in the schema. However, it does not explain what 'start' refers to (e.g., beginning of song) or how 'length' relates to the loop.

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') and the resource ('arrangement loop brace'). It distinguishes from sibling 'get_arrangement_loop' and other set tools by specifying the exact object being modified. The addition of beat units clarifies scope.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention that 'get_arrangement_loop' is for reading, nor any prerequisites or context where setting the loop is appropriate.

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