set_tempo

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits like immediate effect, whether it triggers transport changes, or if it requires the session to be stopped. No mention of side effects or prerequisites.

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 very short (two sentences for tool, one for param). It is front-loaded and easy to scan. Could be slightly more informative without sacrificing brevity.

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?

With a single parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description leaves out critical context. It doesn't explain return behavior (e.g., success indication), error conditions, or relationship to other tempo-related tools. Incomplete for an effective 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% (no descriptions in schema), and description only restates the parameter name ('tempo') and unit ('BPM'). It adds no additional semantics like valid range, step size, or behavior for out-of-range values. Baseline for no schema description is 3.

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 action ('set the tempo') and the resource ('Ableton session'). It specifies the new tempo in BPM. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings; among set_* tools, it is unique enough but lacks explicit differentiation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention context (e.g., whether session is playing, tempo range limits, or relation to other tempo-related tools). Noexclusions or alternatives provided.

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