clyphx_clip_notes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes what actions do (e.g., 'Toggle mute', 'Delete notes') but does not disclose side effects, permissions needed, potential destructive behavior, or system state changes. For example, it doesn't specify if actions are undoable or require a clip to be selected.

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 relatively concise, using a bullet-like list to present many actions efficiently. It is front-loaded with the general purpose and then lists examples. No extraneous text, though the list could be formatted as actual bullets for better readability.

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 (multiple actions, two parameters) and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the track parameter (likely an index), default behavior, error handling, or what happens when invalid actions are provided. Although an output schema exists, the description does not mention return values or success/failure modes.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides examples of valid action strings (e.g., 'CLIP NOTES REV', 'CLIP NOTES(C3) REV'), which adds meaning beyond the schema's bare 'action' property. However, it does not formally describe the 'track' parameter or the exact syntax requirements for the action string, leaving some ambiguity.

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 tool's purpose: executing ClyphX Pro clip note manipulation actions. It lists many specific actions, making it easy to understand what the tool does. Its sibling tools include other clyphx actions like clyphx_clip and clyphx_global, but this tool is distinctly focused on clip notes, so differentiation is clear.

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 provides a list of common actions but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. It implies usage for clip note manipulations, but there is no context like 'use for editing individual notes' or comparison with similar tools like add_clip_notes or remove_clip_notes.

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