midi_delete_cc

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Delete a CC event.' It does not disclose side effects (e.g., what happens to surrounding events), error behavior (e.g., invalid index), or whether the operation is reversible. This is minimal.

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 very concise: one line for the action and two argument descriptions. No redundant information. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate lines), but effective.

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 simplicity of the operation (delete a CC event by two integer indices), the description covers the essential purpose and parameter meaning. However, it lacks details on valid index ranges, error handling, or impact on other data, which might be needed for robust agent usage.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It labels item_index as 'MIDI item index' and cc_index as 'CC event index', which adds context beyond the schema's type and title. However, this is minimal additional value.

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 'Delete a CC event.' with a specific verb (delete) and resource (CC event), distinguishing it from siblings like midi_insert_cc. This is precise and unambiguous.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., midi_delete_all_notes, midi_delete_note), nor any prerequisites or recommended context.

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