piano_roll_add_arpeggio

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Arpeggiate a chord into sequential notes.' It does not disclose whether the original chord is replaced, whether the operation is destructive, how repeats/direction affect the output, or whether MIDI notes must already be selected.

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 single sentence is efficient and free of fluff, but it is under-specified for a tool with seven parameters and no annotations. It is concise in length but does not earn its place by conveying enough operational context.

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 tool has seven parameters, zero schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema. The one-line description leaves critical questions unanswered: whether selected notes are required, what happens to the original chord, and how the parameters shape the resulting arpeggio.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the seven parameters beyond the generic notion of a chord. Parameter names like step_bars, time_bars, and note_duration_bars may hint at meaning, but the description adds no semantics, units, or relationships between them.

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 states a specific verb ('Arpeggiate') and resource ('a chord into sequential notes'), making the tool's core function clear. It does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like piano_roll_add_notes or piano_roll_add_chord, so it loses the top score.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites such as requiring an existing chord selection. The description does not state whether this should be used before or after other piano roll operations.

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