uad_set_sends

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses that this is a batch-set operation and notes a protocol limitation, but it does not explain side effects such as whether existing send levels are overwritten, how errors in a batch are handled, or whether changes are reversible.

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 only three sentences and front-loads the core action, then gives the item shape, then usage guidance. Every sentence adds value and there is no fluff.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not necessary. The description covers the input item shape, typical use cases, and an important limitation. It lacks details on target semantics and error scenarios, but is generally sufficient for selecting and invoking the 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the minimal input schema. It does so by outlining the item structure: {target, send: 'aux1' | 'cue1'... or index, device?, level_db?, pan?, bypass?}. This is helpful, though some nested fields like 'target' and 'device' remain underdefined.

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 'Batch-set send levels into aux and cue buses', which is a specific verb+resource statement. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like uad_set_channels or uad_set_monitor by focusing on send buses.

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?

Explicit 'Use when:' and 'Not for:' sections provide clear context and a specific exclusion (headphone output level). However, it does not name a sibling alternative tool for that excluded case, instead pointing to 'uad://limitations'.

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