set_master_volume

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that values up to 5.0 may clip, which is useful, but does not address immediacy of effect, persistence, or interaction with other mixer settings. The description adds moderate value beyond the schema.

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, using a single sentence for the purpose followed by a clear parameter listing. No wasted words, and the format is easy to parse for an AI agent.

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 a single parameter and the existence of an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose and parameter meaning with constraints. It omits details about the output, but that is mitigated by the presence of an output schema. Slightly more context on when to use (e.g., during performance vs setup) would improve completeness.

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 0%, yet the description fully explains the parameter 'amp' with its meaning ('amplitude multiplier'), default behavior ('1.0 is unity gain'), range ('0.0 silence, up to 5.0'), and a warning ('may clip'). This is excellent compensation for the missing schema descriptions.

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 verb 'Set' and the resource 'master output volume', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'mixer_hpf_enable' or 'load_song' by focusing on master volume control.

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?

While the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus others, it provides clear parameter semantics (amplitude multiplier with range and clipping warning). The context of sibling tools implies usage for overall volume adjustment, but lacks explicit when-not-to guidance.

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