edit_paste

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it specifies the location ('cursor position'), it fails to explain critical audio-editing semantics: whether the operation inserts (shifting existing audio) or overwrites, how it interacts with track selections, or error handling for empty clipboards.

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 single sentence is tightly constructed with zero waste: 'Paste' (action), 'audio' (object), 'from clipboard' (source), 'at the cursor position' (location). Every word earns its place and the information is front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter tool without annotations or output schema, the description covers the core operation adequately. However, given this is a mutation operation in an audio editor, it lacks important context about insertion vs. overwrite behavior and side effects on project state that would be necessary for safe agent operation.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, which per guidelines establishes a baseline of 4. The description appropriately mentions the implicit data source (clipboard) and target location (cursor position), adding necessary context that compensates for the empty parameter schema.

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 provides a specific verb ('Paste'), clear resource ('audio from clipboard'), and precise location ('at the cursor position'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like edit_copy, edit_cut, and edit_duplicate by explicitly mentioning the clipboard mechanism.

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 prerequisites (clipboard must contain audio), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like edit_duplicate, nor does it warn about error conditions (empty clipboard). Workflow guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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