plan_midi_diatonic_harmony

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds that it plans 'literal' harmony voices from 'exact in-scale' notes and depends on current key/scale, but does not describe output format or any side effects. No contradiction.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. Delivers the core behavior and context immediately.

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 read-only planning tool with 4 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description explains the essential function but omits when to use it and what the plan output will look like. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 100% with parameter descriptions already present. The description's 'above or below' hints at signed degreeOffsets but adds little new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('plan'), resource ('literal harmony voices'), and scope ('above or below exact in-scale MIDI notes', 'using Live's current key and scale'). Clearly differentiates from sibling 'apply_midi_diatonic_harmony' by emphasizing the planning (non-applying) nature.

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?

Provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. Mentions using 'Live's current key and scale' as context but does not explain when to prefer this over apply_midi_diatonic_harmony or other plan tools.

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