volume_up

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, covering basic safety traits. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., effect on volume limits, whether repeated calls accumulate, or any prerequisites), so it contributes minimal value beyond the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence conveys the action and default increment with zero waste. The structure is optimal for quick comprehension.

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 one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. However, it lacks guidance on how to choose this tool over siblings, which is relevant given the similar volume-related tools available. The absence of usage context slightly undermines completeness.

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% with a clear description for the step parameter. The description merely restates the default value without adding new semantics, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding of parameter behavior or constraints.

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 verb (augmenter) and resource (TV volume), and specifies the default increment (+5). It naturally distinguishes from siblings like volume_down, volume_set, and mute, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention, for instance, using volume_set for precise values or mute for toggling silence, leaving the selection entirely to the agent's inference from the name and schema.

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