add_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the behavior (add notes at current position, chord vs sequential) and parameter formatting. It does not mention side effects or error handling, but for a note addition tool, the behavioral disclosure is adequate.

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 structured with an Args section and examples, but it is slightly verbose with multiple examples. It front-loads the purpose but includes some redundant formatting explanations.

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?

Given the output schema exists (context signal), the description's mention of 'Success status and notes added' suffices. The examples and parameter details make the tool fully understandable for an AI agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description extensively explains all parameters: notes format with examples, duration options as an enum list, and as_chord behavior. This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema's type-only definitions.

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 'Add notes to the score at the current position,' which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'add_rest' and 'delete_notes' by focusing on note addition.

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 provides examples and explains when to use as_chord vs sequential addition. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, but the context of siblings makes the usage clear.

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