toggle_mute

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The term 'toggle' transparently indicates a state flip, but it does not elaborate on side effects (e.g., whether it affects volume level), system-wide impact, or permissions needed. It provides basic behavioral insight but no extra context.

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, short sentence that immediately states the action and resource. Every word earns its place—no filler, no redundancy—making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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?

For a simple no-parameter toggle tool, the description is adequate. An output schema exists to cover return values, and the description explains the core behavior sufficiently. It could mention edge cases (e.g., if no audio device is present), but this is a minor gap for such a straightforward operation.

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 tool has no parameters, so the schema is fully covered by definition. The description adds no param-specific meaning, but none is needed. Per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool earns a baseline 4, which is appropriately high.

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 uses the specific verb 'toggle' and the resource 'system audio mute', clearly indicating the action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'set_volume' and 'get_volume' by focusing exclusively on mute state, leaving no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 usage is implied: it toggles mute on/off, so an agent can infer when to use it. However, it does not explicitly explain when to prefer this over 'set_volume' (e.g., for adjusting volume) or how to check the current mute state, lacking explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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