mcp_opendaw_add_mastering_chain

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool creates three specific effects (Revamp EQ, Compressor, Maximizer) on the output/master AU and returns effect indices/parameter values. However, it doesn't clarify if it overwrites existing chains or is additive, nor any side effects or dependencies.

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 and well-structured. It begins with a clear action statement, then presents parameters in a readable bulleted list. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, parameters, and result (effect indices and values). It lacks mention of prerequisites or whether the tool is additive, but overall is sufficient for a straightforward tool with two optional parameters.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description fully compensates. It explains target_lufs with concrete examples (-14, -16, -10) and lists four style options with detailed character descriptions. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's bare type/default.

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: 'Add a ready-made mastering chain to the output bus — EQ + compressor + maximizer in one call.' It uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('mastering chain to the output bus'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like add_bass_chain or add_drum_chain by specifying it targets the output bus.

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 implies usage by naming (mastering chain for output bus) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like adding individual effects or other chains. No context on prerequisites (e.g., project state) or when not to use it (e.g., if a mastering chain already exists).

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