mixer_master_volume

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'set' without mentioning side effects (e.g., immediate application, global state change, persistence, or reversibility). It does not disclose any potential non-obvious behavior.

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, containing only essential information: action, target, unit, and range. No superfluous wording.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description covers the core purpose and parameter behavior. However, it lacks details about return value or side effects, which would be expected for a setter operation.

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 single parameter 'db' is described as 'Volume in decibels' and the valid range (-80 to +10) is explicitly given in the description. This provides sufficient semantic meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 action ('Set') and the target resource ('master bus volume'), with a specific parameter range. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mixer_group_volume or vca_volume.

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 implies usage for setting the master bus volume, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., when to use mixer_group_volume instead). However, the scope is clear enough for typical audio mixing context.

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