drum_pattern

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does provide useful behavioral detail: density scales note count, length_bars tiles patterns, and the tool returns notes rather than placing them. However, it does not disclose nondeterminism, the effect of seed/humanize on output variation, or any project side effects, and its density range conflicts with the schema's maximum of 1.5.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the main purpose in the first clause. It uses terse notation for the role set and density behavior, and every sentence contributes meaning without wasted words.

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 core invocation path is covered: required params genre, role, and length_bars are explained, and the return intent is stated. However, this is an 8-parameter generative tool with no output schema and no annotations, so the missing semantics for four optional parameters and the density range inconsistency leave meaningful gaps for an agent deciding how to customize a call.

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 description adds meaningful semantics for role, genre, density, and length_bars, including an explicit role enum and an illustrative density example. But with only 13% schema coverage, it leaves seed, swing, humanize, and start_beats undocumented, and the stated density range "0..1" contradicts the schema's allowable maximum of 1.5.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Generate drum notes for a section." It further distinguishes itself from sibling generators like melody_generate, bassline_generate, and arp_pattern by focusing on drum patterns, naming the selection mechanism, and noting the notes are for a Sampler track.

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 clearly indicates when to use this tool: when drum notes for a section are needed, with genre and role selecting from the pattern library. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, though sibling drum_pattern_list is an obvious complement for browsing patterns.

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