Mute

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 one genuinely useful behavioral trait—that the previous level is remembered for unmute—and clarifies toggle vs. forced state. It does not say which device/session is affected by default, whether it requires permissions, or what happens on an inactive stream.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the forcing semantics and the unmute memory behavior. No filler.

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 described. However, for an unannotated mutation-style control, the description omits device targeting, which stream/session is affected by default, and any permission or failure behavior.

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 explain both parameters. It does a good job on 'muted' (null = toggle, true/false = force), but the 'device' parameter is never mentioned, leaving half the input undocumented in both schema and description.

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?

Names a specific verb (toggle mute) and resource (the media stream), and clarifies that muted=true/false forces state rather than toggling. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings such as media_control, volume_up, or volume_down.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource named ('the media stream') and the toggle-vs-force distinction, but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over media_control or the volume tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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