volume_set

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

Annotations already convey mutation, idempotency, and non-destructiveness. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the schema by providing the calibration '80 = 0dB reference', which helps the agent reason about the resulting loudness. No contradictory claims.

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?

Two short sentences, no filler. The core operation is front-loaded and the calibration note is placed second; 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 simple one-parameter setter with annotations covering safety and idempotency and schema covering the range, the description is complete. No output schema is needed for this kind of command-style tool, and the 0dB calibration fills the only interpretive gap.

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 coverage is 100% and the single level parameter already has type, range, and description. The description still adds meaning by interpreting the numeric scale with the 0dB reference at 80, which is more actionable than the schema alone.

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 ('Règle' / sets), a specific resource ('volume du Denon'), and explicit target semantics ('niveau spécifique 0-98'). This distinguishes it clearly from volume_up, volume_down, and mute_* siblings because it describes absolute level setting, not relative or mute behavior.

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 phrase 'à un niveau spécifique' clearly implies absolute setting, which distinguishes this from the relative sibling tools volume_up and volume_down. It does not explicitly state 'use this for exact level, use volume_up/down for steps', but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer when to choose it.

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