set_volume

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without discussing side effects, failure conditions (e.g., invalid volume_percent out of range), or requirements (e.g., active device). This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 of 8 words, efficient and front-loaded. It could be expanded slightly to include key behavioral notes without losing conciseness, but is not overly verbose.

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?

Given the tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. An agent lacks critical context such as valid volume range, need for active playback, or response behavior. This leads to potential misuse or failure.

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%, and the description adds no information about parameters beyond their names. The 'volume_percent' parameter is implied but no format, range, or semantics are clarified. The optional 'access_token' parameter is not mentioned at all.

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 verb 'Set', the resource 'playback volume percentage', and the platform 'Spotify'. It is distinct from sibling tools which handle playback control (pause, resume, skip) or search, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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. The description implies a singular action, but does not mention prerequisites (e.g., active playback) or when not to use it. Sibling names provide some context, but the description itself lacks usage direction.

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