set_track_master_send

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, confirming this is a safe, repeatable mutation. The description adds routing behavior (audio routes to parent folder or master when enabled) which is valuable context beyond annotations, though it doesn't cover error conditions 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 description is front-loaded with the main purpose, then provides routing context and a usage example, followed by parameter explanation. It is efficient with no redundant sentences.

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 2-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, routing behavior, usage guidance, and parameter meaning. It lacks details on track_index format or potential errors, but is otherwise complete.

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 compensates by explaining the 'enabled' parameter: 'True to enable, False to disable.' For the 2-parameter tool, this covers the key semantic, though 'track_index' remains undocumented.

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 (enable/disable) and resource (master/parent send on a track) with clear scope. It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_send and set_send_volume by focusing on the track's master/parent send toggle.

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 explicitly explains when to disable the send: 'when a track should only output through its sends (e.g., routed exclusively to a bus).' This is clear usage context, though it doesn't name specific alternative tools.

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