quantize_clip

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It implies a mutation of clip notes but does not state whether the operation is destructive or reversible, what happens with partial amounts, or whether it affects selected notes or the entire clip. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 concise with a one-line summary followed by a bulleted parameter list. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded, making it easy to scan quickly.

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?

The description covers the core function and parameters but lacks usage context and sibling differentiation. It does not explain prerequisites (e.g., existing clip), return behavior, or how it differs from quantize_clip_notes. For a tool with no annotations or output schema, it is partially complete but has clear gaps.

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 semantics for all four parameters: track_index and clip_index identify the target, quantize_to provides grid units with examples, and amount specifies strength with a 0.0-1.0 range. This goes beyond the bare schema, though it omits details like indexing base (zero- or one-based).

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 tool quantizes notes in a clip to a grid, specifying the verb, resource, and scope. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling tool 'quantize_clip_notes', which likely performs a similar operation on clip notes, so it lacks explicit sibling distinction.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like quantize_clip_notes or humanize_clip_timing. The description only states the function and parameters without any context on prerequisites or excluded scenarios.

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