create_scene

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: index -1 appends at the end and tempo/time_signature cause Live to switch to them when the scene fires. It does not mention whether inserting at index shifts existing scenes, which is a small gap.

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?

Tight and front-loaded: the core action leads, parameter semantics follow, and a single example call closes it. No sentence is padding.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers all parameters and the tempo/time-signature side effect. It omits prerequisites such as an open Set and the effect of index insertion on neighbouring scenes, but nothing critical to invoking it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 0% and there are 5 params, so the description must carry the load – and it does. It explains index semantics (-1 = end), colour encoding (Live index 0..69 or '#RRGGBB'), tempo units (BPM), and time_signature format ('3/4'), plus a concrete example call.

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 and resource ('Create a Session scene') and clarifies the domain object via the parenthetical 'a song section'. An agent can distinguish it from set_scene, delete_scene, fire_scene and duplicate_scene at a glance.

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 creation for song arrangement but never states when to use this versus siblings like set_scene (modify existing), new_set, or duplicate_scene. No prerequisites (e.g. a Set must be open) are given, so usage is only implied.

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