kde_audio_set_default

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds no context about what is destroyed or replaced (the previous default assignment), whether the change survives across sessions, or what happens with an invalid device_name. For a destructive mutation with no output schema, the description should tell the agent more about effects and failure modes.

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?

A single short sentence with the operation front-loaded and no filler. The trailing 'and verify' is the only vague element, and it costs clarity rather than length.

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?

A destructive, open-world tool with three required unlabeled parameters and no output schema needs substantially more than one sentence. Key gaps include where device_name values come from, how failures are reported, and what 'verify' returns.

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 carries the full burden for three required parameters. It only loosely maps direction to 'output sink or input source' and says nothing about session (a fixed const) or the format and source of device_name, leaving the most error-prone parameter undocumented.

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 names a specific verb (set) and resource (the live default output sink or input source), which is enough to distinguish it from kde_audio_set_volume and kde_audio_set_mute. The added 'and verify' is not explained, so the agent cannot tell whether verification is a separate returned result or a side effect.

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 word 'live' implies this changes the running session's default rather than any persisted configuration, which is useful implied context. But nothing says when to use this instead of routing an individual stream (kde_audio_route_stream), and no prerequisite is stated, such as the device_name needing to come from kde_audio_list.

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