compose_arrangement

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

Discloses that all times are raw seconds independent of tempo, and that there is no bpm parameter. Also reveals the blocking limits (max 2 tracks, 30 notes) to prevent accidental mass inserts. However, it doesn't specify whether the tool creates new MIDI items or modifies existing ones, which is a minor gap given no annotations.

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 fairly long but well-structured: purpose statement, format details, time unit warning with sibling comparison, block limit info, then Args list. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly tightened without losing information.

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 no output schema or annotations and only two parameters, the description covers input formats, time units, limits, and the effect of clear_existing. It also suggests alternatives for larger writes. It doesn't explain error handling or the exact arrangement impact (e.g., item creation vs. modification), but is otherwise comprehensive.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds rich semantics: explains that 'tracks' accepts shorthand or JSON arrays with examples, and explains that 'clear_existing' wipes target tracks. Also clarifies the time unit convention and the absence of a bpm parameter.

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 starts with 'Batch-insert MIDI from shorthand or JSON — guarded for small edits only', which is a specific verb+resource combination that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_drum_pattern and create_chord_progression, which use quarter-notes.

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 states when to use (small edits) and when not to (for larger writes, use batch MIDI tools). Also contrasts with create_drum_pattern and create_chord_progression by highlighting the difference in time units, and advises converting tempo using project_get_info for bar alignment.

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