create_clip

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether an existing clip in the slot is overwritten, whether the new clip is empty, what side effects occur (such as selection or playback), or any required track type. The description only covers the basic create 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 is brief and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a compact parameter list. No filler or redundant content is present.

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 simple creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers parameters well but leaves out important behavioral context such as overwrite behavior, required track type, and relationship to arrangement clips. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 description includes a parameter list that explains track_index, clip_index, and length, adding meaning beyond the bare schema titles and types. It also notes the default for length. However, it does not clarify indexing conventions (e.g., zero-based) or bounds.

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 (create), object (new MIDI clip), and location (specified track and clip slot). The mention of 'clip slot' distinguishes it from the sibling tool create_arrangement_midi_clip for session vs arrangement clips.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_arrangement_midi_clip, nor any conditions or prerequisites. The usage context is only implied by the parameter names, not explicitly stated.

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