mcp_opendaw_remove_modular_module

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explicitly discloses a key side effect: 'All connections to/from this module are also removed.' It also notes the return type (success or error). Missing details like irreversibility, but the major behavioral trait is covered.

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?

Five short lines: one for purpose, three for parameters, one for side effect. Front-loaded and every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 integers, no annotations, no output schema richness needed), the description covers the action, parameters, side effect, and return. It could mention how to obtain valid indices or error behavior, but it is sufficient for a focused mutation tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by explaining each parameter: 'au_index: Audio unit index', 'effect_index: Effect index within the AU', 'module_index: Module index to remove.' This adds hierarchical context beyond the bare integer names. It doesn't specify zero-based indexing or how to retrieve valid indices, but it is meaningful.

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 starts with a specific verb+resource: 'Remove a module from a Modular device.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_modular_module, list_modular_modules, and connect_modular_modules.

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?

Usage is implied by the action and parameter context, but there is no explicit 'when to use' or exclusion of alternatives (e.g., remove_effect for non-modular chains). It doesn't mention prerequisites like obtaining indices via list_modular_modules, but the operation itself is straightforward.

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