clear_clip_envelope

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

The core behavior is stated: clearing all automation. However, with no annotations and no further details, the agent does not know about irreversibility, required permissions, or what happens to the clip's automation state. The description is adequate but lacks depth.

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 one sentence, efficient and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices informative content for brevity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 required params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, preconditions, or the exact nature of the automation being cleared.

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?

The description does not explain any of the five required parameters (ctx, track_index, clip_index, device_index, parameter). The schema has no descriptions, and the description does not compensate, leaving the agent to guess the meaning of indices and the parameter identifier.

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 action (clear) and the target (automation for a device parameter within a clip). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like set_device_parameter or insert_envelope_point, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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 usage context is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives like insert_envelope_point or when clearing automation might not be appropriate.

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