Mute or unmute a source

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

With only minimal annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds substantial behavioral detail: global application across scenes, preservation of saved volume, toggle behavior when 'muted' is omitted, and the return value. This goes well beyond the annotations and paints a clear picture of the tool's side effects.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every clause adds value: global scope, toggle behavior, volume preservation, and return state. No fluff or repetition.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, global behavior, toggle semantics, preserved volume, and return value. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool confidently.

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?

The input schema already documents both parameters fully, including the 'Omit to toggle' hint for 'muted'. The description reinforces this but adds little new parameter-level information. The mention of volume preservation is behavioral, not parameter semantics. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Mute, unmute, or toggle an audio-carrying source'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_source_visibility or set_source_transform. It also clarifies the scope (applies to every scene containing the source), preventing confusion with scene-local mute operations.

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 clear context on when to use this tool: for controlling mute state on an audio source across all scenes. It explains the global behavior and survival across scene switches, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. Still, the context is strong enough to guide proper selection.

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