Color channels

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

Description adds useful behavioral context: the change is one rollback unit reversible by fl_rollback_last_change. Annotations only indicate non-readonly and non-destructive, so description adds value.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. First sentence establishes purpose and differentiation; second sentence adds targeting and undo behavior. Perfectly sized.

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?

Covers purpose, differentiation, targeting, and undo behavior. Does not specify default behavior when channels is null or error handling, but with output schema present, return values are presumably covered.

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 100% with descriptions. Description adds cross-reference for color (same set as fl_set_track_color) and clarifies that channels can be indices or name substrings, adding meaning beyond 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?

Description clearly states the tool sets the color of channel-rack channels, distinguishes from mixer-track color, and specifies targeting by index or name substring. Verb and resource are explicit.

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?

Tool clearly differentiates from mixer-track color, implying alternative use of fl_set_track_color. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use.

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