select_none

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It fully discloses both state-changing effects (deselecting tracks and clearing the time selection), with no hidden side-effect implied. Since the operation is non-destructive and simple, this is transparent enough.

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 description is a single sentence that states both effects clearly with no filler. It is front-loaded and every word 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?

For a no-argument, no-output command, the description fully specifies the observable behavior. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly without further clarification.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter documentation is needed; the description correctly focuses on the operation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Deselect') and a precise resource ('all tracks') plus an explicit additional action ('clear the time selection'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like select_all and select_region by stating the exact inverse operation.

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 explicit when-to-use statement or mention of alternatives. However, the description itself implies usage: when the agent needs to clear all current track and time selections. For a zero-parameter command with an obvious purpose, this implicit context is adequate but not elaborately guided.

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