set_channel_send_to_bus

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says 'Set ... in dB' but does not disclose side effects (e.g., if setting to -inf mutes), valid ranges for level_db, or whether the bus must already exist. The behavioral impact of the operation is unclear.

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 no wasted words, but it is too brief to be helpful. Every sentence should earn its place; here, one sentence is insufficient for a 3-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?

Given no annotations, 3 required params, and an output schema (not detailed), the description is incomplete. It lacks essential details about parameter meanings, edge cases, and return behavior. The agent would have to guess or rely on the output schema.

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%, but the description adds no meaning beyond the schema's generic titles. It does not explain what 'bus' and 'channel' accept (string vs integer) or the unit/range for 'level_db'. The phrase 'how much in dB' is vague.

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 action 'Set' and the resource 'how much of a channel goes to a specific bus/monitor in dB', which matches the tool name exactly. It distinguishes from sibling tool 'get_channel_send_to_bus' which reads the value.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_channel_send_to_bus, set_channel_fader). No prerequisites or context provided. The description only states what it does, not when to use it.

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