get_levels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that levels are 'post-fader' and per strip/bus, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention whether it's a snapshot or real-time, or if any prerequisites exist.

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?

A single sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with the core action ('Current audio levels (post-fader) per strip and bus'), with no redundant words. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it defines scope (strips and buses), timing (post-fader), and intent (spot silent/clipping). It provides sufficient information for an agent to use 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?

There are zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds significant value by specifying 'post-fader', 'per strip and bus', and the use case of spotting silent/clipping paths, exceeding the minimal requirement.

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 'Current audio levels' with a specific verb+resource, and 'post-fader per strip and bus' distinguishes it from sibling tools like mixer_state (state overview) and set_strip_gain (gain adjustment).

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 says 'spot silent or clipping paths', providing a clear use case. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context of sibling tools implies it's for monitoring rather than setting.

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