uad_set_sample_rate

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that confirm=true is required, that the tool refuses while audio is flowing, and explains the consequence (streams glitch), which provides meaningful behavioral context beyond a basic mutation.

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?

Three short sentences with front-loaded purpose, clear use cases, and no fluff. Each sentence serves a distinct role.

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 simple setter with two parameters and an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and critical behavior. It lacks only explicit details on return values and edge cases like invalid rates, which are minor for this tool.

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 has zero descriptions, but the description adds value by specifying confirm must be true and giving rate examples. However, it does not fully enumerate valid rate values or explain failure behavior if confirm is false, so it only partially compensates.

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 opens with 'Change the system sample rate,' a specific verb+resource statement. It includes examples and explicitly differentiates from clock source troubleshooting via 'Not for: fixing a lock failure...' making it distinct from uad_set_clock and uad_get_status.

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 'Use when' and 'Not for' lines provide explicit conditions for appropriate use, including a named alternative (uad_get_status) for a different scenario, meeting the highest bar for usage guidance.

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