set_clip_volume

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the gain semantics (1.0 = unchanged, 0 = mute), which is important for correct invocation. However, it omits other behavioral details such as acceptable range beyond the examples, whether changes are reversible, required permissions, and what the operation returns.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary wording. The most important semantic detail, the gain scale, is included immediately.

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 three-parameter setter with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core operation and key volume semantics. However, given zero schema description coverage, it should do more to explain the project and clip_id parameters and valid volume bounds.

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%, so the description must compensate for all three parameters. It partially explains the volume parameter by giving the scale semantics, but says nothing about clip_id or project. With all parameters undocumented in the schema, this leaves significant gaps.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Set a clip's audio gain.' This clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from general audio tools like audio_loudness. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby editing siblings such as trim_clip or split_clip beyond the resource name.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention related siblings like audio_loudness or audio_waveform, nor does it state any preconditions or exclusions for setting clip volume.

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