add_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description necessarily handles the behavioral burden. It discloses the resource being modified, the requirement for onset with unit, duration, pitch, lyrics, and optional phonemes. It does not explain dry_run behavior or side effects in detail, but 'Add' communicates a mutating action.

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 concise sentence that leads with the main purpose, then lists critical required properties and a useful unit conversion. No words are wasted.

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 note-creation tool, the description covers the essential note structure and unit semantics. It could mention why dry_run exists or how groupIndex/trackIndex address targets, but the schema provides those parameter details, and the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 adds value beyond the schema by specifying the blicks unit conversion and reinforcing what each note must contain. It doesn't discuss dry_run or index params, but those are already covered by 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?

Clearly states the tool's specific verb and resource: 'Add one or more notes to a track/group.' This distinguishes it from siblings like get_notes, update_notes, and delete_notes, and the scope is immediately understandable.

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 clearly conveys the intended context: use when adding notes to a track/group, and gives required conditions for each note. It does not explicitly exclude cases for update/delete, but the action is self-evident enough to guide selection.

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