reset_composition

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions that MIDI is not deleted, but it does not explain what 'unlock' means, what side effects occur, or whether the action is reversible. This is insufficient for a tool that likely performs a nontrivial operation.

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 concise at two sentences, with no wasted words. The primary action is stated first, and the alternative is clearly signposted, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 (0 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the basic behavior. However, it assumes knowledge of 'compose_arrangement' and what 'unlock' entails. An AI agent might benefit from a brief explanation of the context or the nature of the 'locking' mechanism.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema coverage is 100% by default. The description does not need to add parameter information, and it does not detract. Baseline of 4 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 tool's purpose: it unlocks compose_arrangement without deleting MIDI. The verb 'unlock' is specific, and it distinguishes from the sibling wipe_all_midi by noting the difference in MIDI handling.

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 explicitly references an alternative tool (wipe_all_midi) for when deletion is desired, providing clear context for when to use this tool versus when not to. However, it does not elaborate on other potential conditions or prerequisites, leaving some ambiguity.

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