set_swing_amount

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

Annotations provide only destructiveHint=false. The description adds the range but does not disclose whether the change affects existing clips, is reversible, or requires specific conditions. Minimal behavioral context beyond the annotation.

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, no redundant words. The essential information (action, resource, range) is front-loaded and clearly presented.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the main purpose and range. It could mention persistence or effect on existing quantization, but overall it is largely complete.

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 coverage is 0% with no parameter description. The description adds the valid range (0.0 to 1.0) but lacks an explanation of what the amount value represents (e.g., 0=no swing, 1=maximum). The parameter has a clear role, so despite the gap, the description provides partial compensation.

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 ('Set'), the resource ('global swing amount'), and the valid range ('0.0 to 1.0'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'set_groove_amount' and 'set_clip_groove' by specifying 'swing' and 'global' scope.

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 implies usage for quantizing with swing but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_groove_amount' or 'quantize_clip'. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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