Set Eos Channel Intensity

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

The description adds important behavioral context beyond the annotations: it affects Live output immediately and is not automatically recorded into a cue. This complements the readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true annotations, providing the agent with critical side-effect information that structured data alone does not convey.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear one-sentence purpose, an explicit console-equivalent reference, a compact arg list, and a note about recording behavior. Every sentence contributes meaningful information 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?

For a simple two-parameter setter tool, the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, how parameters map, immediate live effects, and the recording caveat. With helpful annotations and no output schema requirement, the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly and understand its consequences.

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 schema already provides full coverage (100%) with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by including the console command equivalent ('Chan <n> At <level> Enter'), which gives semantic context for how the parameters map to real-world usage. It also clarifies that the channel parameter simultaneously selects the channel, a nuance not present in the 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 a specific action: 'Set a channel's intensity level directly (0-100).' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly noting that it both selects the channel and sets the level, unlike eos_select_channel. The console command equivalence ('Chan <n> At <level> Enter') adds concrete clarity.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you want to set a channel's intensity directly. It explicitly addresses the alternative of recording cues by stating the set is not recorded unless eos_record_cue is separately called. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like eos_select_channel for selection-only scenarios, though the 'both selects and sets' phrasing partially covers this.

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