Set Channel Pan

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and idempotent. The description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying accepted input formats (percentage, LR notation, linear) and the range for each, which goes beyond what annotations declare. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence conveys the operation and input flexibility without any redundant words. It is appropriately front-loaded and all content is essential.

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?

This is a simple setter with two required parameters and no output schema. The description fully covers the operation, the channel is clearly parameterized in the schema, and the pan formats are explained in detail. The tool's simplicity means no additional return-value or error-handling details are necessary.

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% and the schema already describes the pan parameter's formats. The description enhances this by providing concrete examples (L50, C, R100) and clarifying the linear range (0.0-1.0), aiding correct invocation beyond the schema.

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 'Set' and identifies the resource as 'stereo pan position for a channel', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like channel_set_volume or channel_set_gain. The intended action is unambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The usage context is implied by the tool's name and the general domain of channel configuration, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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