remove_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 only says notes are removed in a range, but does not mention side effects (e.g., permanent deletion), prerequisites (clip must exist), or behavior on invalid inputs. This is a mutation tool, so the lack of such context is a significant gap.

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: one sentence plus a parameter list that adds necessary semantics. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no filler or repetition.

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?

Given this is a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is somewhat minimal. It covers the parameters and basic purpose but lacks context on when to use it, behavior on edge cases, or how the range interacts with note data. It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent to use confidently.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the parameter list in the description provides essential meaning. It explains each parameter's role: track_index/clip_index as locators, from_time/time_span in beats, from_pitch as MIDI pitch, and pitch_span as count. This goes beyond the schema's bare titles and defaults, though it could add details like inclusiveness or coordinate system.

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 a specific action ('Remove notes from a clip') and a scope ('within a specified range'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like remove_all_notes (which removes all notes) by implying selective removal. The verb and resource are precise.

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 explicitly mention when to prefer this over remove_all_notes or add_notes_to_clip, but the phrase 'within a specified range' implies it's for partial removal. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are given, so usage guidance is merely implied rather than stated.

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