set_sound_hook

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses persistence via EffectsEngine and localStorage, and mentions partial update behavior. However, it omits whether changes take effect immediately or any side effects (e.g., does setting enabled trigger a sound?).

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 reasonably concise but includes emoji examples that, while helpful, slightly increase length. It front-loads the main action and details hook stages efficiently.

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 no output schema and 3 simple parameters, the description covers the hook lifecycle, update behavior, and persistence. It does not mention error conditions or return values, but for a straightforward configuration tool, this is adequate.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that omitted parameters remain unchanged (partial update semantics) and reiterates the volume range. This goes beyond the schema's static field descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool configures a single sound-effect hook stage, enumerates all 6 hooks with emoji examples, and specifies the modifiable parameters (enabled, volume). It distinguishes from siblings like set_master_sfx_volume by focusing on per-stage settings.

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?

It explains that hooks are lifecycle points and that you can pass any combination of arguments (omitted unchanged), which implies partial updates. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other sound tools (e.g., set_active_sound_pack) or state when NOT to use it.

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