set_clip_loop

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It usefully discloses that unspecified attributes are left untouched and that loop positions are expressed in beats. It does not discuss null behavior or marker units, but these are not critical for basic invocation.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, followed by a compact parenthetical list. Every word adds value and there is no repetition of schema titles.

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 seven-parameter tool with no annotations and no schema description coverage, the description provides enough to select and invoke it correctly by listing all tunable fields and clarifying partial updates. It omits edge-case behavior like whether markers require looping, but the output schema likely covers return values and core semantics are present.

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 0%, but the description names all five optional parameters and groups them conceptually (looping, loop bounds, markers). The partial-update note gives meaning to the optional/nullable schema parameters, though track_index and clip_index are left entirely to 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Set') plus a clear resource ('a clip's loop attributes') and enumerates the affected attributes. This makes it easy to distinguish from sibling clip mutators like set_clip_name or set_clip_color.

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?

It establishes clear context for when to use the tool—any time clip loop attributes need modification—and highlights partial-update semantics ('only the ones you pass are changed'). It does not name exclusions or alternatives, but no sibling tool covers loop-specific attributes.

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