Set Pure Data Parameters

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'update' implying mutation and 'running' implying a required state, but it does not explain side effects, parameter constraints, error behavior, or whether changes are reversible. The word 'bounded' suggests internal limits but they are not clarified.

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 concise sentence that gets to the point, which is positive. However, it lacks any structural elements like examples, expected input formats, or additional context that would make it genuinely helpful. It is short but not effectively structured for an agent.

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, output schema, and parameters, the description is far from complete. It does not explain how the tool behaves in typical use cases, what the agent should expect as a result, or how to provide any input. This is a critical deficiency for a tool whose core purpose requires parameter specification.

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 input schema is empty, yet the tool's purpose is to set parameters, creating a glaring gap. The description does not explain how parameters are specified, what those parameters are, or how the tool identifies which parameters to update. With 0 parameters in the schema and no clarification in the description, the agent cannot properly invoke this tool.

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 a verb ('update') and a resource ('bounded live parameters on the running Pd demo patch'), making the core action understandable. However, the term 'bounded' is ambiguous and the description does not differentiate this tool from siblings like pd_send_control or pd_live_update_object, which could also update parameters.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., a running patch), limitations, or scenarios where other tools are more appropriate. The only implicit context is 'running' which hints at a prerequisite but is not explicit.

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