set_track_pan

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Set' implies a mutation operation, the description doesn't address whether this requires specific permissions, whether changes are immediate or require session save, what happens with invalid track numbers, or if there are rate limits. Some minimal context about pan range is provided, but key behavioral aspects are missing.

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 efficient with zero wasted words. The purpose is stated in the first sentence, followed by clear parameter documentation. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information.

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 mutation tool with no annotations but an output schema, the description covers the basic operation and parameter semantics well. However, it lacks context about when to use it, error conditions, or behavioral constraints. The presence of an output schema means return values are documented elsewhere, but the description could better address the mutation's implications.

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 provides crucial semantic information not present in the schema. The schema only shows 'track_number' as integer and 'pan' as number, but the description clarifies that track numbers are 1-based and defines the pan scale (-1.0 = full left, 0.0 = center, 1.0 = full right). This is essential for correct usage given 0% schema description coverage.

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 verb ('Set') and resource ('track pan position'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'set_track_volume' or 'mute_track' beyond the specific parameter being modified.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, timing considerations, or relationships to sibling tools like 'set_track_volume' or 'mute_track' that might affect track audio properties.

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