export_midi

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses default destination directory and that MIDI does not natively store loop metadata, implying the return value is important. However, it does not mention whether it overwrites existing files or required permissions.

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?

Three short sentences with no redundancy. First sentence states purpose, second gives ordering, third explains default directory. Every sentence adds value.

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 that output schema exists (not shown), description mentions return value (loop metadata). Covers key aspects: what it does, order, default path, and engine context. Could add overwrite behavior but not essential.

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 description must compensate. It only adds meaning to destination_dir ('Default destination_dir is assets/midi/ (or NOBU_MIDI_DIR)') but provides no information about project_name beyond its presence in schema.

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?

Description explicitly states verb 'Render all project layers into a single multi-track .mid file', clearly identifying the resource and output format. Distinguishes from siblings like add_layer which add layers rather than export.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call last, after all add_layer calls', providing sequential guidance. Mentions use of returned loop metadata for configuring engines, but does not state when not to use or alternative tools.

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