edit_notes

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

The annotation destructiveHint=false indicates the tool is not destructive, and the description aligns by stating 'edit subset' without implying data loss. The description adds value beyond annotations by detailing the matching rule for removal (pitch+start) and that it does not rewrite all notes.

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 consists of two sentences, front-loading the purpose and then detailing parameter structures. Every sentence contributes essential information without redundancy or excess words.

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 complexity of editing notes with add/remove and the existence of an output schema, the description covers the core functionality well. It lacks explicit explanation for the required indices, but these are intuitive given the context.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the structure for 'add' and 'remove' parameters with specific fields (pitch, start_time, etc.) and the matching rule. However, it does not explain the 'clip_index' and 'track_index' parameters, which are required and could benefit from clarification.

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 edits a subset of notes in a MIDI clip without rewriting all, specifying the add (pitch, start_time, duration, velocity, mute) and remove (pitch, start_time) structures. This distinguishes it from siblings like add_notes_to_clip (which only adds) and delete_clip (which deletes entire clips).

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 clear context for usage by explaining the tool edits a subset of notes without rewriting all, and specifies the matching rule for removal. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_notes_to_clip, nor does it mention exclusions.

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