set_macro

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool sets a macro and mentions value/value_normalized semantics via reference to set_device_parameter. However, it does not explain side effects, reversibility, or behavior if the macro is not found.

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 only two sentences, with the primary purpose front-loaded and the semantics reference in the second sentence. No superfluous content.

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 a simple setter with an output schema present. The description covers the macro identification and value semantics. While it does not address all edge cases, the combination of description and schema is sufficient for a tool of this complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'macro' parameter accepts an index (0-based) or name, and clarifies value semantics via set_device_parameter. It does not explain track_index or device_index, but these are straightforward from their names.

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's purpose: 'Set a Rack macro by index (0-based) or name.' This is specific with a verb and resource, distinguishing it from set_device_parameter and other tools.

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 context by targeting Rack macros specifically, differentiating from set_device_parameter. It also references shared semantics with set_device_parameter, offering guidance for value handling, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool.

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