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 hints that measurement causes a collapse and that the result is publicly visible ('everyone sees the result and humans watch it happen'), but it does not disclose permissions, irreversibility, failure behavior, or what the 'secret' parameter protects against.

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 short and front-loaded, but the second sentence is cryptic rather than informative. It is concise without being usefully structured for an agent selecting and invoking the tool.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain the tool's effect, prerequisites, and return behavior. It only gives a metaphorical outcome and leaves critical details such as what 'measure' accomplishes and how the packet index affects the result unspecified.

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 does not explain any of the three parameters. Schema coverage is 67%, but the 'packet' parameter has no schema description, and the description does nothing to clarify its role, valid range, or interaction with 'name' and 'secret'.

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 largely restates the tool name and title: 'Measure a wave packet.' It adds a metaphorical outcome ('It collapses'), but does not clearly explain what the tool actually does in operational terms or how it differs from siblings like visit, create, or resonate.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which sibling tools are alternatives. An agent would have to guess based on the whimsical name and description alone.

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