set_clip_groove

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

Annotations already indicate non-destructive behavior. Description adds that the tool attaches a groove (swing/timing feel) and that omitting groove_index clears it. It does not disclose edge cases like invalid indices or what happens if no groove pool exists.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, no wasted words. Every part adds value.

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 simple setter tool with an output schema present, the description is mostly complete. It covers the primary action and clearing behavior. It could mention that the groove must exist in the Groove Pool, but overall adequate.

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 description must compensate. It only clarifies the groove_index parameter ('Pass no groove_index to clear') but provides no additional meaning for clip_index or track_index beyond their names.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Attach' and the resource 'clip', specifying that it attaches a Groove Pool groove by index. It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_clip_name or set_clip_color by explicitly mentioning the swing/timing feel effect and the clearing behavior when no groove_index is provided.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., clearing a groove implies using this same tool, but no mention of prerequisites like having a groove pool defined). No explicit when-not or alternative tools like get_grooves are referenced.

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