ableton_modify_master

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

The description only states 'modify', indicating a write operation, but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as reversibility, side effects on automation, permission requirements, or confirmation feedback. With no annotations, this leaves a significant transparency gap.

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 concise sentence, but it lacks necessary detail for a tool with six parameters and no output schema. It is efficient but insufficiently informative.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, error handling, or the effect of combining parameters, making it incomplete for effective usage.

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 names three of six parameters (volume, pan, cue volume) but omits solo, muted, and verifyToleranceDb. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but it is incomplete, adding only partial context.

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 modifies master mixer state with specific examples (volume, pan, cue volume). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ableton_modify_track and ableton_modify_return by targeting the master mixer.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context for selection among sibling tools, leaving the agent without decision support.

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