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, covering the safety profile. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not clarify whether this sets an absolute mute state or toggles, nor what happens if no paired TV exists, which is the key ambiguity for a state setter.

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 six-word sentence with no filler, front-loading the operation. It is appropriately sized, though its brevity is a symptom of missing substance rather than disciplined editing.

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 values need not be explained, and the tool is simple with two parameters. However, the description omits the state-setting semantics and the default-TV behavior, leaving meaningful gaps for an agent invoking a mutation.

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 only 50% – the tv parameter is documented in-schema while the required muted boolean has no description. The phrase 'mute or unmute' loosely hints at the boolean meaning but does not compensate for the missing parameter documentation or explain the default-TV fallback.

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 pair (mute/unmute) and resource (TV), so the operation is immediately understandable. It does not differentiate itself from sibling tools like set_volume or get_status, but the verb+resource 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus set_volume or other TV-control siblings, and no stated prerequisites (e.g., a paired TV must exist). The agent must infer usage context entirely.

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