apply_sound_design_preset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'apply' without indicating whether existing device settings are overwritten, whether the operation is reversible, or if any specific conditions need to be met. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 compact: a single purpose sentence followed by a clean parameter list. Every piece of information earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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?

Despite the clear parameter descriptions, the tool is a mutation operation with no annotations and no output schema. The description does not mention return values, error conditions, or preconditions (e.g., device type or preset existence). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to use it safely and correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explains each parameter meaningfully. It clarifies that track_index and device_index identify the target device, preset names come from music_theory.SOUND_PRESETS with examples, and user_prompt is for telemetry. This adds clear value beyond the bare schema.

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 function with a specific verb and resource: 'Apply a starter sound design patch to a device by preset name.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like load_instrument_or_effect or set_device_parameter, which perform different 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The parameter list provides some context but does not mention when this should be chosen over other device-related tools, nor does it state any exclusions or prerequisites.

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