convert_clip_time

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds domain nuance beyond that (source seconds are file-local and include excerpts; offsets are not applied automatically), but it does not disclose return format, unit rounding, or failure modes for unwarped clips beyond the schema's tempo_path note.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and the caveat second. The phrasing is efficient, though the offset sentence is somewhat cryptic and could be clearer without much added length.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the annotations cover safety. The description conveys the essential concept and the excerpt caveat, but for a conversion utility with a required direction enum and a conditionally-required tempo_path, it stops short of stating prerequisites or edge-case behavior.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the meaning of 'value' (source seconds or song quarter-note beats) and reinforces the offset caveat, but adds no syntax, range, or format detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Convert file seconds and song beats'), and no sibling tool performs bidirectional source/song clock conversion, so it is distinguishable. However, the phrase 'through actual Warp or step/ramp tempo' is jargon-dense and doesn't cleanly communicate the transformation to an outside reader.

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 second sentence implies usage context by warning that excerpts require applying the producer's source offset separately, which is genuine situational guidance. But it never states when to prefer this tool over related read/write tempo tools (e.g. read_tempo_map, apply_tempo_map), leaving alternative selection to inference.

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