Channel Mute Control

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint false and idempotentHint true, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal extra context (e.g., 'channel on/off state') but no significant behavioral disclosure beyond what annotations provide.

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 a single sentence with no redundancy, front-loading the verb and resource. Every word is purposeful, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool with complete schema coverage, strong annotations, and no output schema, the description is fully sufficient. It establishes the domain and operation without needing additional elaboration.

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 provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both 'channel' and 'muted'. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already documents, warranting the baseline score.

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 the specific verb 'Mute or unmute' with a clear resource 'input channel on the X32/M32 mixer'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like bus_mute and main_mute by explicitly specifying the input channel scope.

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 clearly implies that this tool is for input channels only, providing context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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