set_send_level

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

No annotations exist. The description says this is a write operation ('set'), but doesn't disclose whether send slots are reused/overwritten, or if validation/errors occur when the track isn't a return track. It identifies only the direct state change.

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?

Single complete sentence with all key parameters; no redundancy or filler.

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?

Output schema exists, but the description doesn't describe the return format or response semantics. Sufficient parameter documentation exists for the primary operation; missing preconditions and side-effect info.

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 adds meaning beyond the schema: track_index is 1-based and send_index explicitly maps to return tracks (1 feeds return A, 2 feeds B). The value meaning (normalized 0.0-1.0) is specified, which the raw schema does not convey.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'set' with a clear resource (send level) and distinguishes from siblings by naming send slot mapping; no ambiguity about the 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?

States what it does and names the parameters, but no explicit when-to-use or alternative context is given (e.g., adjusting track volume would be set_track_volume).

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