unsolo_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It accurately describes the core behavior (removing solo from every track) but does not disclose side effects, reversibility, or potential interactions with session/arrangement views. For a simple state-change tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 a single, compact sentence with no filler or redundant details. It earns its place by clearly conveying the action and scope without any waste.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description completely captures the operation's scope and effect. No additional context is necessary, as the task is simple and unambiguous.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema confirms no properties. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed. As per the rubric, 0 params yields a baseline of 4, and the description adds no conflicting or extraneous parameter information.

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 'Clear solo on every track' uses a specific verb (Clear), resource (solo), and scope (every track), making its purpose immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_track_solo (per-track solo) and unmute_all (mute control) by explicitly targeting all tracks and the solo state.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternatives are mentioned. However, the intent is implied by the name and description—use it when you want to unsolo all tracks. This is minimal viable but lacks explicit contextual instructions.

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