write_notes

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds important details: 'replace' clears the clip first, 'replace_range' clears notes starting in [start, end), and default note values are listed. It does not cover permissions or return behavior, but for a destructive write it adds meaningful context beyond annotations.

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 dense but well organized: purpose first, then mode behavior, note format, chord support, and a concrete example. Every sentence adds value; no waste.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, nested note objects, no output schema) and 0% schema coverage, the description covers the core note-writing mechanics well but omits definitions for several top-level parameters and does not clarify broader write semantics (e.g., how 'add' interacts with existing notes).

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%, so the description must compensate. It thoroughly explains the complex 'notes' parameter structure (pitch, start, duration, velocity, etc.) and the 'mode' enum, but leaves several top-level parameters (track, slot, arrangement_clip, end, start) undefined despite being 7 parameters total.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Write MIDI notes into a clip.' This clearly distinguishes it from pure readers like get_notes and from related mutators like edit_notes or transform_notes, though it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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 explains mode behaviors but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as edit_notes, delete_notes, or write_drum_pattern. It only implies usage from the core purpose.

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