Clear all mutes + solos

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by specifying it affects all mixer tracks and resets mutes/solos. However, it does not discuss side effects or state what happens to other settings. The idempotentHint annotation (false) contradicts the implied idempotent behavior of a reset, but the description does not address this.

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 sentence plus a tagline, with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and clearly communicates the purpose immediately.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, clear purpose), the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, when to use it, and its effect. The existence of an output schema further reduces the need for return value documentation.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (zero parameters). According to the rules, a baseline of 4 is appropriate since no parameter information is needed.

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 explicitly states 'Unmute and unsolo every mixer track (reset)', clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fl_mute_tracks and fl_solo_tracks by being a global reset, and the tagline 'universal undo' further clarifies its role.

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 description implies usage after bulk solo/mute actions by calling it 'the universal undo for the bulk solo/mute tools'. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, though with zero parameters the context is sufficient.

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