mcp_opendaw_list_clips

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds behavioral detail: clip types (NoteClipBox, AudioClipBox, ValueClipBox), their fields, storage location (TrackBox.clips), and track_index=-1 semantics. This goes beyond the annotation's safety flag.

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?

Structured with a one-line purpose, bullet-pointed clip types, and short parameter/return lines. No filler; each section adds necessary context.

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 list tool with output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return fields. It lacks error handling or ordering details, but these aren't critical for a listing operation.

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 has only titles with 0% coverage. Description explains unit_index as 'Audio unit index' and track_index as 'Track index (-1 = all tracks on the unit)', providing the special sentinel value. This is essential context missing from the schema.

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?

Description opens with 'List clips (session view / clip launcher) on tracks' — a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from arrangement-region tools by explicitly scoping to session view/clip launcher. The three clip types further clarify what 'clip' means.

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 gives context that clips live on TrackBox.clips and explains track_index=-1 means all tracks, but it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this tool over list_tracks or list_audio_regions. The session-view scoping implicitly tells the agent when to use it.

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