midi_generate_complement

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states the output is complementary and mentions the input format. No behavioral traits like destructive effects, error handling, or side effects are disclosed.

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 two sentences, but it lacks structure such as parameter lists or behavioral notes. It is not verbose but misses crucial details, making it borderline adequate.

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 6 parameters and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain output, parameter effects, or usage contexts. The output schema exists but the description should still provide sufficient context for agent invocation.

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% and the description only mentions the guide_notes parameter format. Parameters like seed, density, register, similarity, and call_response are unexplained, adding no value beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool generates a complementary MIDI melody (not a duplicate) from guide notes. It includes the specific verb-resource pair and input format, differentiating it from potential duplicates.

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 implies usage with guide notes in beat-space but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like midi_vocal_to_complement or other generation tools. No exclusions or context are given.

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