Create tempo sync

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it creates a beat-synced clock with specific output channels, and optionally broadcasts a beat event over WebSocket. This is consistent with annotations (openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false) and discloses side effects without contradicting them.

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 four concise sentences, each earning its place: creation, usage, optional event broadcast, and a pairing recommendation. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids redundant wording.

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 description covers the tool's outputs, the WebSocket event, and how to use it, which is adequate for a creation tool with no required parameters and no output schema. It doesn't mention that a self-contained 'tempo_sync' container is created at parent_path, but that detail is in the schema. Given the tool's moderate complexity, it is reasonably complete.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already well-documented. The description adds no new parameter-specific details; it mentions emit_events in passing but doesn't expand on parameter syntax or format. It only reinforces the general purpose of the created channels.

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 creates a tempo clock driven by TouchDesigner's global tempo, exposing specific beat-synced channels (ramp, pulse, beat/bar counters, bpm). This distinct action and output set separates it from sibling tools like create_beat_grid_sequencer or create_audio_reactive.

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 gives clear context: bind parameters to the exposed channels to lock visuals to the beat, and pair with extract_audio_features for musical reactivity. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives, but the use case and pairing suggestion are clear.

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