set_tempo

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

The annotation destructiveHint=true already signals destructive action. The description adds the formula (seconds_per_beat = 60 / bpm), which provides behavioral context beyond the annotation, though it doesn't detail other effects.

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 a single sentence with the formula, no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently conveys the essence.

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?

With one parameter, an output schema present, and a destructive hint annotation, the description is complete for the tool's simplicity. It covers the purpose and a key behavioral detail (the formula).

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 coverage is 0%, but the tool has only one parameter, bpm, whose meaning is obvious. The description provides the downstream formula but does not elaborate on the parameter beyond its name and constraints in 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 the tool sets the project tempo in BPM, with a downstream formula. The verb 'set' and resource 'project tempo' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like set_time_signature.

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 setting tempo, a distinct task. While it doesn't explicitly list when-to-use or alternatives, the context of sibling tools (e.g., set_time_signature) makes the use case clear.

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