mcp_opendaw_set_track_volume

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and provides substantial behavioral detail: it discloses the VolumeMapper.decibel(-96, -9, +6) powerByCenter mapping, the valid range (-96 to +6 dB), and the raw value at 0 dB (0.768). This goes beyond a generic 'set volume' statement, though it does not mention side effects or prerequisites.

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 three sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the subsequent sentences add essential technical detail. Every sentence 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 simple two-parameter setter with an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It fully specifies the volume range and mapping, and unit_index is obvious. It lacks usage guidance and does not explain how to identify the target audio unit, but these are minor gaps for a low-complexity tool.

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 must compensate. It adds meaning to volume_db by giving the range and mapping, but it leaves unit_index undefined. While unit_index is self-explanatory from its name, the description does not explicitly connect either parameter to the schema, so it only partially compensates.

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 'Set volume of an audio unit in dB' with a specific verb and resource, and provides the dB range. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like set_track_panning or set_effect_parameter, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The mapping and range imply usage context, but there is no explicit direction, so it scores 2 (no guidance).

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