transport_set_bpm

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden but only states the basic action and parameter range (20-999). It does not disclose side effects, whether changes apply immediately, or impact on playback.

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 extremely concise at one sentence plus an argument listing. However, it could benefit from a slightly more structured format (e.g., separate sections for behavior and constraints).

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core function and parameter constraints. However, it omits behavioral details like whether the tempo change affects current playback or requires stopping.

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, but the description compensates by adding the valid range '20-999' for the BPM parameter, which is absent in the schema. This adds meaningful context beyond the raw type.

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 'Set project tempo', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like detect_common_bpm (detection) and tempo_add_marker (marker-based tempo).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tempo markers or detection. The description lacks context such as prerequisites or typical use cases.

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