Adjust output volume (measured)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a behavioral trait: reporting the PipeWire sink state before and after the action, which is useful. However, it does not mention any potential side effects (e.g., persistence, sink selection) or permissions. The reporting behavior is a positive addition, but coverage of side effects is incomplete.

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 that front-loads the core actions and the reporting behavior. Every word contributes to the meaning, with no redundant filler. It is appropriately compact for a tool with two parameters.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, and the description fails to explain what exactly the 'report' contains (e.g., volume level, mute status). It also does not contextualize how this tool differs from closely related siblings like audio_output_switch or speaker_tuning_status. Given the tool's low complexity, this is a notable gap but not severe.

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 50% (only 'step' has a description). The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it repeats the action values ('raise, lower, toggle mute') already present in the enum, and does not explain 'step' further. Since coverage is moderate, the description should compensate for the undocumented 'action' parameter, but it adds no new insight, making it insufficient.

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 raises, lowers, or toggles mute on output volume and reports the PipeWire sink state. It identifies the specific resource (output volume) and the action set, effectively distinguishing it from audio-related siblings like audio_sink_availability or audio_devices.

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 for adjusting volume, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the many audio-related siblings (e.g., audio_output_switch, audio_device_set_default). There are no exclusions or comparisons to alternatives, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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