game_audio_bus

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only lists settable properties without explaining side effects (e.g., that muting overrides audio, or how volume interacts with mute/solo). No information is given about the tool's safety profile or state changes beyond the literal action.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the core functionality without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action. However, it could be slightly expanded to improve clarity without becoming verbose.

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 complexity of an audio bus (interplay of volume, mute, solo) and the lack of output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain that busName defaults to 'Master', how multiple parameters interact, or what the tool returns after execution. An agent may lack key context for reliable invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the parameter names in a sentence. It achieves the baseline expectation but does not enhance understanding of parameter values, defaults, or constraints.

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 specific verbs ('Set volume, mute, or solo') and clearly identifies the resource ('audio bus'). It is distinct from sibling tools like 'game_audio_bus_layout' (which likely manages bus structure) and 'game_audio_effect' (which applies effects), making it easy for an agent to understand its intent.

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. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., bus must exist), exclusions, or scenarios where sibling tools like 'game_audio_bus_layout' or 'game_audio_play' would be more appropriate.

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