add_locator

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

With no annotations, the description reveals basic behavior: adding a locator at a given beat or current position. However, it omits details on overlapping names, limits, or destructiveness. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the essential purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. Highly efficient.

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 tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description covers the main action and default behavior. It could mention how the name is used or any caveats, but overall it is sufficiently complete for basic usage.

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 description must clarify parameters. It explains the name is required and time defaults to current position, but does not specify the format or constraints for time (e.g., beat units) or the role of name (label?). Adds some meaning but not fully.

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), the resource (arrangement locator/marker), and the location (specific beat position or current playback). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_warp_marker and list_locators by specifying 'arrangement' and 'locator/marker'.

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 usage for adding markers in the arrangement but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor when not to use it. No alternatives are mentioned.

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