mcp_opendaw_get_sample_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds value by explaining what metadata is returned (sample rate, channels, frames, loading state) and that an error is returned if the sample is not found. This gives useful behavioral context beyond the annotation.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence contributes necessary information without redundancy.

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 read-only getter with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description fully covers the purpose, parameter source, return fields, and error behavior. No important information is missing.

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 provides no description for sample_uuid (0% coverage), but the description compensates by explaining it is the UUID of the audio sample and references list_samples as the source. This is critical guidance for correctly supplying the parameter.

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 'Get' with a clear resource 'audio sample' and specifies metadata retrieval by UUID. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_audio_file_info by focusing on sample metadata and naming sample-specific return fields.

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?

It explicitly tells the user where to obtain sample_uuid ('from list_samples'), giving clear context on when to use this tool. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the workflow is clearly implied.

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