clear_clip_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses key side effects: clears notes in one Live undo step, reports observed delta, and returns structured errors for empty/audio clips. This goes beyond schema. Missing info on permissions or exact return format, but solid.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then side effects and example, then edge cases. Three short sentences, no waste, well-structured. Could be slightly more concise but effective.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, side effects, example, and edge cases. It lacks parameter definitions and return format details, but given the simplicity (2 params, no output schema), it's largely 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides an example ``clear_clip_notes(0, 1)`` showing track_index and clip_index usage, but does not explicitly define parameter meanings or types. The example helps but is insufficient for full semantic clarity.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Remove every MIDI note from one Session clip' clearly states what it does. The example clarifies it empties a MIDI clip without deleting it. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like delete_clip or add_notes_to_clip, though the MIDI note scope is distinct.

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 (empties a MIDI clip) and mentions edge cases for empty or audio clips, but does not state when to use this versus alternatives like delete_clip or add_notes_to_clip. No explicit when-not guidance.

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