set_tempo

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It hints that only the 'starting' tempo is affected, but never says what happens to an existing tempo map, whether the change is undoable, or what is returned. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a real 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though it is arguably too terse to carry the guidance an agent needs.

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?

Three optional parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and no explanation of optionality (all default to null) or interaction between bpm and time signature. The description is not complete enough for a tool of this nature.

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 67% (numerator and denominator are described; bpm is not). The description names both concepts but adds no format, valid-range, or interaction detail beyond the schema fields, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Sets the project's starting tempo and/or time signature.' An agent immediately knows what changes. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling set_tempo_map or get_tempo_map, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no exclusions. With closely related siblings like set_tempo_map and transport in the list, the description should say when this single-shot setter is preferred over the tempo-map tool, but it offers nothing.

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