select_clip

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden, but it does disclose a meaningful behavioral trait: the operation is a UI selection ('highlight... in the clip view') rather than a data mutation. It omits error behavior, whether playback/selection state changes, and any permission context.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter selection tool, though it is arguably too sparse to carry the definition's weight.

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?

No annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage leave the description doing all the work, yet it says nothing about index semantics, failure modes, or interaction with the current track/clip selection. Incomplete for calling the tool 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 coverage is 0% and neither track_index nor slot_index is explained. The description adds no meaning about indexing base, valid ranges, or whether slot_index is session-slot only, so agents get no help beyond bare integer properties.

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 clear verb (highlight/select) and resource (a clip slot in Live's UI), and adds the effect that the user sees it in clip view. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like select_track or fire_clip, but the resource is unambiguous.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as select_track or fire_clip. The phrase 'so the user sees it' hints at a UI-navigation purpose but leaves selection conditions for the agent to infer.

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