uad_set_preamp

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It warns that 48V phantom power can destroy ribbon microphones and requires confirm_condenser_mic=true, and notes digital inputs have no preamp. However, it does not mention that unset parameters are left unchanged or describe the immediate effect on the device.

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 compact and front-loaded: three sentences cover the function, usage conditions, safety warning, and exclusions with no repetition of schema fields or filler.

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?

The output schema covers return values, so the description can focus on context. It includes the has_preamp prerequisite, the safety concern, and alternatives. It could add a note about null parameters meaning 'no change,' but overall it is adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It names most controls (gain_db, pad, low_cut, phase, hi_z, source, phantom_48v) and clarifies source values ('Mic'/'Line') plus the confirm_condenser_mic requirement. But it omits target/device semantics and gain_db units/range, leaving meaningful gaps.

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 uses a specific verb+resource ('Set preamp controls on one mic/line input') and enumerates the relevant fields, making it clear this is a preamp-focused tool. It also explicitly differentiates from uad_set_channels fader_db, distinguishing it from a sibling.

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?

It provides a direct 'Use when' condition (setting recording gain/input options when has_preamp is true) and a 'Not for' exclusion (fader level and digital inputs), explicitly naming the alternative sibling uad_set_channels for fader adjustments.

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