mixer_mute

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

readOnlyHint=false already signals a state-changing operation, and 'Mute...output' is consistent with that. The description usefully scopes the effect to the master output, but does not disclose whether the mute is a durable state change, whether it toggles, or what observable effect it has on playback.

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 with no wasted words; the scope ('master') is stated immediately.

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 no-parameter, no-output-schema toggle with annotations covering the write nature, this is nearly sufficient. The only meaningful omission is the relationship to mixer_unmute (is this a toggle or an absolute set), which would remove the last ambiguity.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the schema; the baseline for a 0-param tool applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Mute) and resource (the master mixer output), and the qualifier 'master' distinguishes it from the per-channel sibling mixer_channel_volume. It does not explicitly name the sibling it is not, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance and never mentions mixer_unmute as the reversing alternative or any precondition. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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