Replace specific patterns in music code to modify compositions. Use this tool to change musical elements by specifying search text and replacement values.
Replace pattern section
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| search | Yes | Text to replace | |
| replace | Yes | Replacement text |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'Replace pattern section', which hints at mutation but lacks details on side effects, state requirements, or what happens to the pattern. The description is too brief to be transparent.
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 short, which could be seen as concise, but it lacks sufficient information to be helpful. It is not front-loaded with key details and does not earn its place as a complete communication.
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 tool with 2 simple parameters and no output schema, the description should provide basic context. It does not explain what constitutes a 'pattern section' or how the replacement operates, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented in the schema. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond the schema, so baseline of 3 applies.
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 states the verb 'Replace' and resource 'pattern section', but it is ambiguous what a pattern section is. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like append, insert, or update that also modify patterns.
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 on when to use this tool over alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without context for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.