set_time_signature

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by explaining that it changes bar/grid and metronome interpretation but does not rewrite clip notes, and that repeating the same signature has no additional effect. No contradiction.

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?

Three sentences front-load the purpose and scope, immediately followed by usage guidelines and behavioral notes. No superfluous 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 tool's simplicity, the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, safety (idempotent, non-destructive), and parameter scope. The output schema exists (not shown) but the description's focus on input is adequate for this tool.

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 100%, with both parameters having descriptions that explain meaning (e.g., 'Number of beats per bar' for numerator). The description does not add new information beyond the schema, so 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 verb 'set' and the resource 'Live set's global time signature', with concrete examples like 4/4, 3/4, 6/8. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'set_clip_signature' by specifying 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?

Explicitly provides when to use this tool (global time signature) versus when to use an alternative ('Use set_clip_signature instead when only one clip needs a different meter for polymeter'). Also states that repeating the same signature has no effect.

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