set_master_pan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states this is a setter (mutation), but it does not provide additional context such as whether the change is undoable, whether it affects live playback, or if there are any side effects. The pan range is disclosed, which adds some detail, but other behavioral traits are absent.

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 concise: a single purpose sentence followed by a clear parameter breakdown. It is front-loaded with the primary action and has no redundant or filler content. Every word adds value.

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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential aspects: what it does and what the parameter means. It could be enhanced by noting that it modifies the master track's pan during playback or that it complements set_master_volume, but for a basic setter, it is sufficiently complete.

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 description thoroughly explains the 'pan' parameter with a concrete range (-1.0 to 1.0), the meaning of values (left, right, center), and an example (0.0 is center). The schema only provides type 'number' with no description, so the description fully compensates for the missing schema-level documentation.

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 opens with 'Set the master track panning,' which clearly identifies the specific verb (set), the resource (master track), and the property (panning). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_track_pan and set_return_pan, which target other tracks.

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 this tool is for adjusting the master track's pan, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like set_track_pan or set_return_pan. It lacks exclusions or contextual guidance, so while the usage is inferable, it is not explicit.

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