midi_guess_chords

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions the sliding window and default window size but lacks details on side effects (e.g., read-only), limitations (e.g., polyphonic handling), or prerequisites. Minimal disclosure of behavioral traits.

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?

Two concise sentences cover purpose, method, default, and output format without redundancy. Every sentence adds value; 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 an output schema exists, the high-level return format is described. However, with no parameter descriptions and missing usage context, the description is incomplete for a tool with 4 parameters and no annotations. Adequate but not thorough.

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%, yet description only adds context for window_beats (default value). Required parameters path, track_index, clip_index are not described, leaving their meaning unclear. The description adds little 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 guesses chords across a MIDI clip using a sliding window, distinguishing it from siblings like midi_estimate_key and midi_note_stats. The verb 'guess' and resource 'chords on a MIDI clip' are specific.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or avoid this tool. The description implies chord detection but does not contrast with alternatives. However, the tool name and sibling list provide implicit context.

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