wwise_set_attenuation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool creates a new ShareSet and sets a distance curve, implying a mutation operation. It also provides default for parent_path, which is useful. However, it lacks details on permissions, reversibility, rate limits, or response behavior. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain returns, but the description still misses key behavioral context for a mutation tool.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded: it starts with the main action, followed by a clear args section. Every sentence serves a purpose. It could be slightly more structured with bullet points for parameters, but it's efficient and easy to parse.

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 complexity (4 parameters, 3 required, no annotations, output schema exists), the description covers the basics but lacks usage guidelines and deeper behavioral context. The output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, but the description should at least mention when to use this tool, potential side effects, or dependencies. It is adequate but incomplete.

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 compensate. It does so by explaining each parameter: name, curve_type with examples (VolumeDryUsage, LowPassFilterUsage), curve_points as JSON array of {x, y, shape} points, and parent_path with default. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema titles. The only gap is not specifying the full set of possible curve_type values or the exact JSON format for curve_points, but overall it's strong.

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 states a specific verb+resource: creates an Attenuation ShareSet and sets its distance curve. This is clear and distinct from wwise_create_object and wwise_set_property. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling wwise_set_property, which might also set properties. The core purpose is clear but sibling differentiation is not made explicit.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like wwise_set_property or wwise_create_object. The description does not state prerequisites, context, or exclusions. It simply states what it does without helping the agent choose.

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