set_balance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, so the description's 'Set' is consistent. The description adds the valid range (-100 to 100), but does not disclose other behavioral traits like whether changes are immediate, reversible, or require the player to be active. With annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate – adequate but not rich.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence that states the purpose and includes the valid range. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple with 2 required parameters, but the description does not mention what the response looks like or error conditions. Since there is no output schema, the description should provide some guidance on return values or side effects. This gap lowers completeness to a 3.

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 input schema already describes both parameters with full coverage. The tool description does not add any semantic information beyond what the schema provides (e.g., the level range is already in the parameter description). Therefore, per the rules, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb-resource pair ('Set left/right balance on a player') and includes the valid range (-100 to 100). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like set_bass, set_treble, set_volume, etc., which control different audio parameters.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_bass, set_treble, etc. There is no mention of when not to use it or what prerequisites are needed (e.g., player must be playing). The agent would have to infer usage from the name and range.

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