validate_score

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

No annotations provided; description indicates a read-only validation report but does not explicitly state behavioral traits like side effects or permissions.

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?

Concise and well-structured with clear sections for Args and Returns, no unnecessary content.

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?

Covers main aspects but could be more detailed about the validation checks and the format of the report. Output schema exists, reducing some burden.

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?

Adds meaning beyond the schema (0% coverage) by explaining voices as a dictionary mapping names to pitch lists and key as analysis key.

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?

Clearly states it validates a score, listing specific checks. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like validate_voice_leading.

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?

Implied usage for comprehensive validation, but no explicit guidance on when to use versus more specific checks or alternatives.

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