Configure REW Audio

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, yet it says nothing about whether set_input/set_output interrupt an active measurement, whether changes persist, or what auth/connection state is required (rew_api_connect exists as a sibling). The mutation actions are just bare labels.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The only structural weakness is that the action list is presented as complete when it is not.

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 5-parameter, multi-action, mutation-capable tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least flag side effects and connection prerequisites. It omits four actions and gives no return-shape or side-effect information.

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 100% and each parameter is annotated with its purpose, so the baseline is 3. The description's action list is redundant with the enum and actually less complete, adding no meaning beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Configure REW audio devices via API') and enumerates action names, which distinguishes it from non-API siblings like rew_analyze_decay. It stops short of 5 because the action list omits four of the nine enum values, so the stated scope understates what the tool does.

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?

'Use to select measurement mic and output device' gives a hint of intent, but never says when to pick this over nearby tools such as rew_api_measure_workflow or rew_api_calibrate_spl. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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