音量を設定

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only repeats the basic action without disclosing side effects (e.g., persistence, device selection behavior, failure handling, or interaction with mute). This is minimal disclosure, just a restatement of the tool name with a range.

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 a single short sentence with zero wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and range, and there is no unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain when to choose this over relative volume controls, what happens with device selection, or whether the change is permanent. Given the sibling tools, an agent lacks critical context for correct invocation.

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 100% for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely echoes the volume range. It doesn't clarify the device parameter or provide format details, but the schema already covers it.

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 states the verb 'set' and the resource 'volume' with an explicit range (0-100), which clearly differentiates it from siblings like volume_up, volume_down, and get_volume. Even though it's terse, the action and target are unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings such as volume_up, volume_down, and mute, an agent is left to infer that this sets an absolute value, but the description never explicitly states that or mentions exclusions.

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