Reset peak hold indicators on all tracks and master to clear accumulated peak values. Use before playback for clean gain staging readings.
Clear the peak hold indicators on all tracks (including master).
Resets the held peak values that accumulate during playback. Use before a fresh playback pass when you want clean readings for gain staging.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.7.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, which are consistent with the description. The description adds behavioral context by explaining what gets reset ('held peak values that accumulate during playback') and confirms idempotence implicitly by describing a reset 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by usage context. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.
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, parameterless mutation with clear annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, and usage. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to call it 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?
The tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not applicable. Per the rubric, 0 params yields a baseline score of 4; the description does not need to compensate for any schema details.
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 a specific verb and resource: 'Clear the peak hold indicators on all tracks (including master).' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_track_peak_hold (which reads) by specifying the clearing action and scope covering all tracks.
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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use before a fresh playback pass when you want clean readings for gain staging.' It does not mention when-not-to-use or alternatives, but no direct alternative exists among siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.