track_mute

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

No annotations and the description only states the action without revealing side effects, reversibility, or impact on other tracks. The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the bare operation.

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 extremely concise and directly to the point, with no unnecessary words or information. It efficiently communicates the purpose and parameters.

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 action, the description is adequate. However, it omits any mention of return values, error handling for invalid track indices, or side effects on playback. Given the lack of output schema, it could benefit from a note about expected results.

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 description includes a clear explanation of both parameters: track index (0-based) and mute boolean (true=mute, false=unmute). This adds meaning beyond the raw schema, which has no field descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the specific action (mute/unmute) and resource (track), and distinguishes from siblings like track_mute_all and raw_track_mute by focusing on a single track.

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 (e.g., raw_track_mute, track_mute_all). The description implies a single-track operation but doesn't state conditions or exclusions.

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