mcp_opendaw_list_script_samples

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses useful behavioral details: each slot is a WerkstattSampleBox with label, index, and a file pointer, and the pointer is null until a sample is loaded. This adds meaningful context about the return structure and null-state behavior.

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, with three sentences that each add value: the main purpose, the slot structure, and the auto-creation/null behavior. It is appropriately front-loaded and free of 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?

The description covers the domain concepts and return semantics well, and the presence of an output schema helps with the return side. However, the complete lack of parameter explanations leaves a significant gap in how to invoke the tool, especially with three required parameters and no schema descriptions.

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 descriptions cover 0% of the three required parameters, and the description does not compensate. It mentions 'scriptable device' but never explains how device_type, unit_index, or device_index map to that concept. The agent is left with no guidance on how to fill the required arguments.

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 'List @sample declaration slots on a scriptable device', which uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes this tool from siblings like mcp_opendaw_list_samples by focusing on @sample declarations and scriptable devices. The additional details about WerkstattSampleBox slots make the scope unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (inspecting sample slot declarations on a scriptable device) and clarifies that slots are auto-created from code declarations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is strong enough to guide tool selection.

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