set_input_audio_balance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It gives the balance range but does not disclose error behavior, prerequisites (e.g., input must be audio), side effects, or whether changes are reversible. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 minimal and well-structured: a single sentence for purpose followed by a clean parameter list. Every word earns its place; no fluff or redundant repetition.

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 setter with low complexity, the description covers the core purpose and parameters. However, it lacks usage guidelines, error handling, and return value expectation (no output schema). It is adequate but leaves gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 description fully explains both parameters: input_name as 'Name of the input' and balance with its range 0.0 (left) to 1.0 (right) and center at 0.5. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, which has no descriptions for these properties.

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 'Set an input's stereo balance' clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes this setter from sibling tools like get_input_audio_balance and other set_* audio controls (e.g., set_input_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?

The usage is implied by the verb 'Set' but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes get_input_audio_balance, but the description does not mention that relationship or any prerequisites.

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