load_device_to_return

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

The description discloses non-idempotent behavior ('repeated calls add duplicates') and that loading selects the return track. This adds significant context beyond the annotations (idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false). No contradictions.

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?

Three concise sentences. First sentence defines purpose, second adds behavioral details, third provides usage context. No wasted words, front-loaded, and easy to parse.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained. The description covers behavioral side effects, prerequisites (search_browser), and usage context. For a simple two-parameter tool, this is fully 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 the input schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description reiterates the schema's info (obtain item_uri from search_browser, zero-based index) but adds little new semantic value. Baseline 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 clearly states 'Append one loadable browser device or preset to a return track's chain,' specifying the action (append) and target (return track). It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming alternatives: 'use load_instrument_or_effect for a regular track or load_device_to_master for the Master chain.'

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?

Explicitly tells the agent to obtain item_uri from search_browser. Provides contextual advisory: 'Prefer audio effects on returns' and warns about repeated calls creating duplicates. Directs to alternatives for different track types, making usage clear.

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