fire_scene

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

Annotations are minimal (idempotentHint false, destructiveHint false). The description adds behavioral context: it fires row clips together, can replace/stop clips based on slot launch behavior. This goes beyond annotations, though it could also mention what happens if no clips are in the scene.

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 sentences plus a third for alternatives. No redundant information, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With one parameter, clear annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the launch behavior, replacement/stop effect, and offers alternatives. No gaps.

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% (the only parameter 'scene_index' is described as 'Zero-based Session-view scene (row) index.'). The tool description does not add new meaning to the parameter; it only reinforces the context. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Launch a Session-view scene') and the resource ('scene'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools 'fire_clip' (single track) and 'start_playback' (Arrangement transport). Verb+resource is specific and 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?

Explicit guidance: use for Session launching, not for single-track or Arrangement transport. Mentions launch quantization and slot behavior, giving clear context on when and how to use.

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