set_track_output

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

With no annotations, the description indicates a mutation ('Set'), but lacks details on side effects, allowed values for output_name, or behavior on invalid inputs. It is minimally transparent.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides a helpful reference. Front-loaded structure.

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 simple setter nature and existence of an output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It omits parameter details and error conditions, which are not covered by the schema.

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 0%, and the description only implies output_name comes from get_routing_options. It does not describe track_index or channel, so the agent lacks guidance on parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 sets audio output routing for a track, with a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like set_track_input by specifying 'output' and references get_routing_options, providing context.

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 explicitly advises the agent to use get_routing_options to find valid output names, guiding correct usage. However, it does not mention prerequisites like track existence or when this tool is inappropriate.

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