ableton_clip

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds a real constraint ('Limit 1..512') and the notion of paged note retrieval, which is useful behavioral context, but it says nothing about what 'inspect' returns or error 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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the core action and the pagination constraint front-loaded. Every clause carries information.

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 read-only inspector with no output schema, an agent still lacks a sense of what the response contains (clip metadata vs. note arrays) and how offset interacts with limit. The safety profile is covered by annotations, so the gap is moderate rather than critical.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate; it partially does by stating the limit bounds (1..512) and implying offset/include_notes via 'a page of MIDI notes'. However, track and slot — the two required parameters — get no explanation beyond their names.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Inspect one Session clip', distinguishing it from the broader siblings like ableton_tracks and ableton_inspect_set. The added 'optionally a page of MIDI notes' clarifies scope, though it never explicitly names an alternative to disambiguate.

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 phrase 'optionally a page of MIDI notes' implies when to enable note retrieval and pagination, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or reference to sibling tools. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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