mcp_opendaw_set_send_pan

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

No annotations provided, yet the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is destructive, requires existing sends, or returns a result. The tool has an output schema, but its content is not mentioned. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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: one sentence for the action followed by a bullet list for parameters. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and wastes no words.

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?

The description lacks information about prerequisites (e.g., send must exist), potential side effects, and the return value (despite an output schema). Compared to sibling tools like set_send_level, it does not provide enough context for safe and correct use.

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?

Each parameter is described in plain language: unit_index as source AU index, send_index as index on source AU, and pan with allowed range. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type-only information, though it could specify zero-based indexing and error conditions.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Set the stereo pan for an aux send') and provides the range of the pan value. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_send_level and set_send_routing by specifying 'pan' and 'stereo pan'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, there are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, leaving the agent to infer from the name and description.

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