Set a speed master's tempo, scale and learn mode

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so richly: it discloses the exact command sequence sent and its order, the locked-master refusal, that every linked sequence follows the change, that master 16 tracks sound input and may move again, and what verify/preview actually do. This is exactly the mutation-and-side-effect detail an agent needs.

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 dense paragraph that front-loads purpose and the settings before behavior. Every clause carries real information, but the run-on form makes it harder to scan than it could be with brief structuring.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers parameters, side effects, command order, failure mode, and the verify/preview readback path. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 only 13%, so the description must compensate and does: master is bounded to 1-16, tempo is explained as the EFFECTIVE tempo under the final scale with 0 stopping the master and a 225x-scale cap, speed_scale lists legal values, learn_mode explains each tap/scale interaction, and verify/preview semantics are given. It adds meaning well beyond the bare 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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Sets one speed master (1-16)', then enumerates the three settings it controls (tempo, speed_scale, learn_mode). Distinguishes itself from siblings like gma3_speed_masters and gma3_speed_master_action by naming exactly what it configures rather than merely reading or acting on masters.

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?

Gives operational context (verify defaults to true, preview sends nothing, refuses a locked master) that implies when to use it, but never explicitly names an alternative sibling or states 'use this instead of X when Y'. Usage is inferable but not routed.

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