Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• generate_presetA
  4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the return path but omits crucial behavioral details such as overwrite behavior, error handling, or permissions needed for writing to the presets folder.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value without extraneous words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description covers the main workflow (building spec, writing file, return path) and notes default handling. However, it lacks information on error scenarios and file naming conventions, which would be useful for this complex creation tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With 0% schema description coverage at the top level (per context), the description compensates by explaining how to build the spec from natural-language and that empty sections keep defaults, adding significant value beyond the schema's own definitions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description begins with 'Write a new Serum 2 preset' specifying the verb and resource, and it clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'edit_preset', 'list_parameters', and 'describe_preset'.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description explains that the agent should build the spec from natural-language and that empty sections keep defaults, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions.

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

• describe_presetA
  4.1/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Description explicitly states 'human-readable summary' and lists parameter categories, implying no side effects (read-only). Could be more explicit about being non-destructive, but adequate.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence front-loaded with purpose, zero wasted words. Structure efficiently conveys tool function and scope.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Tool has simple interface (1 param) and an output schema (not shown). Description covers the key scope (all parameter categories). Could mention read-only nature or return format, but given the output schema handles return details, it is sufficiently complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0% for the single parameter 'preset_path'. Description does not elaborate on the parameter (e.g., format, allowed values, examples). Despite the parameter name being self-explanatory, the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's name.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description uses specific verb 'Return' and resource 'human-readable summary of an existing preset's sound-shaping parameters', listing categories (oscillators, filters, etc.). Clearly distinguishes from siblings generate_preset, edit_preset, list_parameters by being a read-only summary tool.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Description clearly states when to use: to get a human-readable summary of a preset's parameters. While it doesn't explicitly say when not to use or name alternatives, the sibling list and description imply usage context (summary vs. generation, editing, or listing).

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

• edit_presetA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral details. It states the operation is in-place and returns the file path. However, it does not mention whether the operation is destructive, what permissions are needed, or any side effects. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three sentences long, each serving a clear purpose: stating the action, advising best practice, and stating the return value. No unnecessary information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a moderately complex editing tool, the description covers the partial update pattern, prerequisite call (describe_preset), and return value. It could mention error handling or file existence requirements, but is generally complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the partial update concept and giving an example of using the spec parameter. The schema has detailed sub-schemas but lacks a description for preset_path; the tool description compensates with usage context.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it applies a partial update to an existing .SerumPreset file in place. The verb 'apply' and resource 'SerumPreset file' are specific, and the mention of 'in place' distinguishes it from generating new presets.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description advises calling describe_preset first to see the current state and provides an example of a partial edit (brightening the filter). It implies the tool is for modifying existing presets, but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives beyond the sibling tool reference.

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

• list_parametersA
  4.6/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Describes return value comprehensively (JSON with schema details), implying idempotent read operation. No annotations provided, but description adequately conveys behavior for a simple data retrieval tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Three succinct sentences: one for purpose, one for output detail, one for usage advice. No redundant information, well structured.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given presence of output schema, description covers essential input constraints (none) and output contents. Includes proactive usage guidance, making it fully sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters5/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  No parameters, and description adds value by detailing the output content beyond the empty input schema, compensating fully for zero parameters.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Explicitly states it returns the full documented Serum 2 parameter schema as JSON, specifying contents (modules, ranges, units, enums, verification confidence). Distinguishes from siblings (generate, edit, describe presets) by focusing on schema retrieval.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Directly advises to call before proposing an edit to know valid parameter names and ranges. Provides clear context for use, though does not explicitly list when not to use or alternatives beyond sibling tools.

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