vca_volume

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does add the valid dB range and target path format, which are useful behavioral constraints. However, it doesn't disclose out-of-range behavior, idempotency, or failure modes — acceptable for a simple setter but not exemplary.

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?

Two short sentences plus a two-line argument breakdown. Every word earns its place; no fluff. Front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by parameter details.

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?

For a simple 2-parameter setter with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it does, the volume range, and the target format. Nothing critical feels missing given the tool's low 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 — and it does by explaining the target format ('vca:/ path or {guid}') and the db units/range. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though it's concise rather than exhaustive.

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 a specific verb+resource ('Set a VCA's volume') with a useful unit and range ('in dB (-80 .. +10)'), making the purpose immediately clear. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the action is unmistakable and consistent with the tool name.

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 by documenting both arguments and the target's accepted format ('vca:/ path or {guid}'), along with the valid volume range. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or exclusions relative to nearby volume-related siblings like mixer_group_volume or vca_assign.

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