set_dyn_notch_max_hz

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

No annotations provided, so the description is the sole source. It adds the default value and tuning effect, but does not disclose side effects, immediate application, or failure modes beyond schema range checks. Adequate for a simple parameter setter.

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 two concise sentences plus a format hint. It front-loads the purpose and immediately provides actionable defaults and benefits, with no wasted words.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool does, the effect of the parameter, and offers a default recommendation. No additional context is needed.

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?

The schema already documents type, range, and description. The description adds value by stating the default (600) and explaining the rationale for narrowing (improved resolution), which helps the agent understand when to deviate from the default.

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 'Set' and the resource 'dyn_notch_max_hz', defines it as 'Maximum frequency any notch will track', and contrasts with min_hz siblings by specifying 'max'.

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?

Provides default advice ('Default 600 is fine for most builds') and tuning benefit ('Narrowing the range improves notch resolution'), guiding when to reduce the value, but lacks explicit exclusions or comparison to alternatives like set_dyn_notch_min_hz.

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