ecamm_set_mute

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: the operation is idempotent because it reads current state first, since the underlying Ecamm API only toggles. That is exactly the kind of implementation detail an agent needs to call it confidently.

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, front-loaded with the core action, followed by the default-scope rule and the idempotency caveat. Every sentence carries information the agent would otherwise have to guess.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the definition covers the action, the default target, and the toggle/idempotency quirk that would otherwise cause surprises. The remaining gap is minor: no statement of what happens on failure or what state is returned, which matters somewhat for a mutation 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It does explain the default semantics of an omitted 'bus' (main output mute), but it says nothing about the individual bus values beyond the enum in the schema, and 'muted' is only implied by the tool name.

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?

States a specific verb and resource pair (mute/unmute) plus the scope qualifier that omitting 'bus' targets the main output. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from adjacent siblings such as ecamm_set_volume or ecamm_toggle.

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 usage through the 'omit bus for the main output mute' rule, which tells the agent how to target the main output versus a specific bus. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or when-not conditions.

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