create_clip

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the MIDI-track requirement, the no-overwrite behavior, and the fact that the result is read-back verified. It does not state the exact error/failure mode for occupied slots or invalid inputs, which would make the behavior fully transparent.

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 front-loaded with a one-sentence summary, then organized into compact Args, Returns, and Note sections. There is no filler; each section provides necessary operational information.

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 create operation with no annotations, the description covers the Session context, MIDI-track requirement, occupied-slot caveat, and verification return. It is complete for normal invocation; only edge-case failure behavior is left unspecified, which is a minor gap.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it does: all four parameters are documented with semantic meaning beyond the schema. Track is an index into song.tracks and must be MIDI, slot is an index into track.clip_slots, length_beats is loop length in beats with a default, and name is optional.

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 and resource: create an empty MIDI clip of specified length in a Session slot. It also clarifies that the target must be a MIDI track, which distinguishes it from general clip operations and siblings like write_clip_notes.

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 core use case is clear from the first sentence, and the note adds an explicit when-not: it does not overwrite occupied slots and directs agents to call delete_clip first when replacing. It does not explicitly route to sibling tools such as write_clip_notes for workflows that need note content, so it stops just short of full 5.

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