set_drum_pad_mute

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly defines the mute parameter as 'True to mute, False to unmute,' which clarifies the behavior. However, it does not disclose any side effects (e.g., whether the change persists, affects playback, or errors on invalid pads). The behavior is implied but not fully transparent.

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 one-line summary followed by a clear Args list. Every sentence is informative, and it is front-loaded with the action. No wasted words.

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 state-change tool with four fully documented parameters and an output schema present, the description covers the essentials. It lacks error-handling notes or prerequisites, but these are not critical for this straightforward operation. The presence of an output schema mitigates the need to describe return values.

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 input schema provides only titles with no parameter descriptions (0% coverage). The description compensates by listing each parameter with meaningful context: track_index and device_index are zero-based, pad_index is a MIDI note number (0-127), and mute is a boolean flag. This goes well beyond 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 the action ('Mute or unmute') and the resource ('a specific drum pad in a drum rack'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_drum_pad_solo. The verb+resource structure makes the purpose immediately obvious.

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 context that this tool operates on drum pads within a drum rack, and the parameter list clarifies the addressing scheme. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_drum_pad_solo for soloing), nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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