fire_clip

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It merely states 'Start playing a clip' without revealing side effects like whether other clips stop, whether transport starts, or whether any prerequisites exist.

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 two sentences plus a parameter list, making it highly concise and front-loaded. Every element contributes to basic understanding, with no unnecessary filler.

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 tool that manipulates Ableton clip playback, this description is too sparse. It lacks information about launch behavior, how indices can be obtained, and when to use this over similar tools, making it incomplete given the absence of annotations and output schema.

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 adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining that track_index refers to 'the track containing the clip' and clip_index to 'the clip slot containing the clip.' However, it omits crucial details like whether indices are zero-based, which limits the added value.

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 uses a clear verb+resource structure ('Start playing a clip'), which immediately conveys the tool's function. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like stop_clip or select_clip, as it targets the action of triggering playback.

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 fire_clip versus alternatives such as fire_scene, start_playback, or stop_clip. The description only lists parameters without any contextual distinction or exclusions.

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