mixer_mute

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only states the action (mute/unmute/toggle) but fails to mention potential side effects, error handling, or prerequisites. Important behavior like whether the operation is reversible or what happens with invalid track indices is omitted.

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, efficient sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and provides the essential nuance about the toggle behavior, earning its place.

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 covers the core functionality and the toggle nuance, but lacks context about the track parameter (e.g., valid range), return values, error conditions, or any prerequisites. Given the simplicity of the tool, it is minimally adequate but could be more complete.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description clarifies the critical ambiguity of the 'muted' parameter by explicitly stating that 'None = toggle'. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's bare type definition.

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 action: mute, unmute, or toggle. Combined with the tool name 'mixer_mute' and the required 'track' parameter, it precisely identifies the resource and distinguishes from sibling mixer tools like mixer_solo or mixer_set_volume.

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 versus alternatives like mixer_solo or mixer_arm. The description only explains the toggle behavior but omits context for appropriate usage.

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