get_clip_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only says 'Get all MIDI notes from a clip' without mentioning that it is a read-only operation, what the return format is, or how errors are handled. This is minimal transparency for a tool with no annotation context.

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 extremely concise and efficient. It includes one line describing the tool and two lines for parameter descriptions, with no filler or redundant content. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple getter with two well-described parameters, the description is mostly adequate. However, there is no output schema, so the description should ideally outline what the returned MIDI notes look like. Additionally, it lacks any usage context or relationship to sibling tools, leaving the agent with only a minimal understanding of the tool's full behavior.

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 input schema provides only parameter names and types, with 0% coverage of descriptions. The tool description compensates by explaining each parameter: 'track_index: The index of the track containing the clip' and 'clip_index: The index of the clip slot containing the clip.' This adds meaningful context that the schema lacks.

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 tool's function: 'Get all MIDI notes from a clip.' It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('MIDI notes from a clip'). However, it does not distinguish between session clip notes and arrangement clip notes, which is relevant given the sibling tool get_arrangement_clip_notes.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does and lists parameters, without mentioning any exclusions or preferred contexts. For example, it doesn't clarify that this tool is for session clips while get_arrangement_clip_notes is for arrangement clips.

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