set_master_fx_parameter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only states the action and value range, but does not disclose if the operation is destructive, what happens with out-of-range values, or any side effects on the plugin state.

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 a single sentence with 12 words, very concise. It front-loads the core action and value range. However, the brevity sacrifices necessary detail for completeness.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the three required parameters are fully underexplained. The description fails to guide on how to obtain fx_index and param_index, or what the tool returns. This is insufficient for correct invocation.

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%, and the description adds no parameter-level explanation. The parameter names (fx_index, param_index, value) are not elaborated, leaving the agent to guess meanings like 'index of the FX plugin' or 'parameter index within that plugin'. The description only generalizes 'normalized parameter'.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'set' and the resource 'master track FX plugin', with the specific constraint of normalized value range (0.0-1.0). The sibling tool 'set_fx_parameter' implies this is for master track only, providing implicit distinction.

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 only states what it does, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_fx_parameter'. No when-not-to-use or context provided.

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