set_mute

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a non-destructive state mutation. The description usefully adds that volume level is preserved, which is a real behavioral trait beyond the annotations, but says nothing about persistence, required permissions, or return behavior.

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 purpose statement is front-loaded and zero-waste. The Args block is functional but reads as restated schema rather than added insight, slightly diluting an otherwise tight definition.

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 one-boolean, non-destructive toggle with no output schema, the description supplies everything needed to invoke it correctly. Only richer behavioral context (persistence, permissions) is absent, which is minor here.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter's meaning — and it does, defining both boolean values ('True to mute, False to unmute'). It fully covers the single parameter, though it adds no format or default nuance beyond that.

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?

States a specific verb (mute/unmute) and resource (sound output), and the clause 'without changing the volume level' implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling set_volume. An agent can select this over set_volume without opening a schema.

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?

Usage is only implied: the 'without changing the volume level' clause suggests set_volume is the alternative for volume changes, but neither set_volume nor any when/when-not condition is named. No prerequisites or context are given.

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