set_clip_pitch

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the operation itself. It lacks details on side effects, reversibility, or error conditions. The semitone range is more parameter semantics than behavior.

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 and well-structured, starting with a clear purpose statement followed by a compact parameter list. Every line provides useful information with no redundant text.

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 setter, the description covers the essential parameters and purpose. However, it does not mention the return value, error handling, or prerequisites (e.g., existing clip), which would be useful for an agent to invoke it correctly without further context.

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 brief explanations for all three parameters, including the pitch range (-48 to +48), which is helpful given the schema only provides titles. However, it omits important context such as whether track/clip indices are 0-based or 1-based, limiting its completeness.

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 ('Set') and the resource ('pitch shift of an audio clip'), making it easy to distinguish from sibling setters like set_clip_gain or set_clip_loop. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 implies its usage (to adjust clip pitch) but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as get_clip_pitch for reading the current pitch. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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