get_scale_notes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the input parameters (root, scale_type) but does not disclose the return format, such as whether it returns MIDI note numbers, note names, or an array. Edge cases and validation behavior are also omitted.

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 highly concise: a one-sentence purpose followed by a clean bulleted parameter list. Every element earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler 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?

The input parameters are well-documented, but the description is incomplete regarding return values and usage examples. Since there is no output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns, making it only partially complete for a simple utility.

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 schema has 0% parameter description coverage, but the description fully compensates by defining 'root' as a MIDI note number in the 0-127 range with middle C reference, and 'scale_type' with an exhaustive list of options. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 'Get the notes in a musical scale', which is a specific verb+resource pairing. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_clip_notes, which retrieves notes from a clip, by focusing on scale construction.

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 implies when to use the tool (whenever scale notes are needed) but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention any alternatives. It's a self-contained utility, but lacks clear usage context.

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