set_tuner

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

The annotations already state that this is a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds useful domain semantics about the reference pitch range and that mute affects output while tuning, but it does not explain defaulting, partial-update behavior, or persistence.

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 only one short fragment with no filler, and the key domain constraint is front-loaded. Its terseness is efficient, though the missing verb makes it slightly less clear as a structured tool definition.

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?

This is a simple two-parameter setter with annotations and no output schema, so the description need not explain return values. The description supplies enough domain meaning to invoke the tool correctly, but it omits default values and whether omitted fields are left unchanged.

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 carry parameter meaning. It does so for both parameters: reference_hz is the tuner reference pitch within 430-445 Hz, and mute controls whether output is muted while tuning. It stops short of explaining defaults or how omitted parameters are handled.

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 identifies tuner reference pitch and mute state, but it is a sentence fragment with no explicit verb such as 'sets'. The domain is clear enough to distinguish tuner configuration from siblings like set_global or set_mixer, but the action is left implicit in the tool name.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no comparison to alternatives such as get_settings or set_global. An agent must infer entirely from the tool name and parameter names that this configures tuner-specific settings.

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