bassline_generate

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

No annotations and no statement of side effects, output, or whether the generated bassline is added to a track, returned as data, or rendered. An agent cannot tell what will happen after the call beyond the implied generation.

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?

Three short sentences; purpose is front-loaded and every sentence adds parametric or scope-relevant meaning. No redundant or filler 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?

The tool is simple enough that the prose may suffice for generation, but missing output/return semantics and workflow context leaves ambiguity about how it integrates with the DAW session. No annotation coverage to fill those gaps.

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?

Provides useful extra meaning for roots, feel, scale_intervals, and chord_duration_beats, but start_beats is left undocumented and requiredness of roots/chord_duration is not highlighted. Since schema coverage is only 40%, the description partially compensates but not fully.

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 exactly what the tool does in the first sentence — 'Generate a bassline under a chord progression' — and distinguishes it from melodic/drum/arrangement siblings. The subject and object are explicit.

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 guidance on when to choose this over sibling generation tools (e.g., melody_generate, drum_pattern) or how it fits into a composition workflow. The description explains individual parameters but not use conditions or prerequisites.

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