midi_notes_add

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing side effects. It does not state whether notes are appended, merged, or replace existing notes, nor does it describe potential errors (e.g., invalid clip_id, out-of-range pitch) or return values.

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 concise, using two clear sentences with no redundancy. The key information is front-loaded, and the parameter clarification is efficiently placed.

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 relatively simple with two parameters, but the description lacks any mention of error handling, return values, or interaction with the existing clip's state. Without annotations or an output schema, more detail would be needed to fully prepare an agent for all realistic scenarios.

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 clarifies that pitch is MIDI 0-127 and that channel is per-clip, not per-note, which adds useful context beyond the schema. However, it does not explain the meaning or units of start_beats and length_beats, nor the behavior of velocity and colour defaults beyond schema constraints.

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 the action ('Add notes') and the target ('existing MIDI clip'), and the parameter structure is explicit. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like midi_clip_add and midi_notes_clear.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as midi_clip_add (creating a clip) or midi_notes_clear (removing notes). It implies the clip must already exist, but does not contrast it with siblings or mention edge cases like overwriting existing notes.

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