Toggle microphone mute (measured)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool toggles mute and reports state before and after, revealing its side effect and observable outcome. It does not mention edge cases like failure modes or permissions, but for a simple toggle this is adequate.

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 action and clearly specifies the reporting behavior. It is concise with no filler, earning every word.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description explains the essential behavior (toggle and report state). It could specify what the 'state' output looks like or whether it returns a value, but the description is otherwise self-contained given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document. Per rubric, a zero-parameter tool gets a baseline of 4. The description appropriately makes no parameter claims.

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 a specific verb ('Toggle') and resource ('microphone mute'), and adds the detail that it reports the PipeWire source state before and after. This distinguishes it from other audio tools like audio_volume or audio_device_set_default, which have different purposes.

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 (when you want to mute/unmute the mic) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it. There is no mention of alternative tools, though the name and description make the primary use case obvious. This is a clear but unguided description.

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