clear_locators

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It explicitly labels the operation as 'Destructive' and confirms it removes 'ALL locators,' clearly conveying the safety profile and scope of the action.

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 consists of two short, purposeful sentences: the first states the action and scope, the second adds the destructive caution and use case. There is no filler or repetition.

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 parameterless destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, the scope, the destructive nature, and the intended use case. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters and the schema is trivially complete. The description adds the 'ALL' qualifier, reinforcing that no targeting is possible, which aligns with the empty parameter list. Baseline for no parameters is 4.

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 'Delete ALL locators (cue points) from the song.' This is a specific verb+resource with a clear scope ('ALL') and directly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_locator (which sets a single locator) and clear_arrangement_clips (which clears clips, not locators).

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 provides a clear context for use: 'for redoing locator placement.' It implies this is the wholesale reset before re-adding locators, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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