Set Channel Preamp Gain

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing the mutating but non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it controls the input gain stage before channel processing, which provides useful context. However, it does not disclose potential side effects such as clipping or how the gain value maps to actual dB.

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 two concise sentences that immediately state the action and provide clarifying context. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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 no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It explains the purpose and scope, and the annotations cover side-effect safety. It might mention a requirement to be connected to the mixer, but that is implicit given the tool family and sibling connection tools.

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 100% for both parameters (channel and gain), including ranges and descriptions. The description does not add new parameter-level details beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 clearly states the tool's function: setting the preamp gain for a specific input channel on the X32/M32 mixer. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying 'preamp gain' and 'input gain stage before channel processing', which differentiates it from channel_set_volume or channel_set_pan.

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 implies when to use this tool (e.g., for adjusting input preamp gain) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It provides context that this is the gain stage before processing, which loosely guides usage, but lacks direct comparison with similar operations like volume adjustment.

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