set_input_volume

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the core mutation behavior ('Set') and the range constraints for both volume parameters, but does not mention return values, error behavior, or what happens if both parameters are supplied (despite saying 'exactly one').

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 concise, uses a clear 'Args:' format, and front-loads the action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 3-parameter setter with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, parameter meanings, ranges, and the key constraint. It lacks explicit error handling details but is sufficient for correct invocation in most cases.

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 schema only lists parameter names and types; the description adds the meaning of each parameter, including the dB range (-100..26) and linear multiplier range (0..20), and the mutual exclusivity requirement, which is not present in the 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 uses a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('input's volume'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_input_volume. The 'pass exactly one' clause further clarifies its operation.

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 provides clear context for use (setting input volume) and specifies the parameter constraint, but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or state when not to use it. The sibling list includes many audio tools, but no explicit guidance is given.

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