volume_set

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

The description adds no behavioral detail beyond the annotations: it does not say whether setting volume unmutes, whether it accepts out-of-range values, or what side effects apply. Annotations already convey idempotence and non-read-only status, but the description itself carries no extra behavioral context.

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 clear sentence that front-loads the operation and resource. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool.

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 tool with a fully documented schema and helpful annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. It lacks only nuance about interaction with mute or the meaning of 'level' in the broader state model, but the core call is 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 coverage is 100% and the level parameter is documented with its 0-60 range. The description only repeats the idea of a specific level, adding no meaning 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 states a specific action ('Regle le volume') and target ('a un niveau specifique'), making it clear this is an absolute volume setter rather than a relative adjustment. It distinguishes itself from volume_up/volume_down by the word 'specifique', though it does not explicitly name the alternatives.

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?

Usage is implied: use this tool when you want a specific absolute volume level, versus volume_up/volume_down for increments. There is no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternative, so context must be inferred.

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