adjust_strength

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses non-destructive adjustment (no waveform change), call limit, step amplitude limit, and recommends observing after each call. No contradictions.

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?

Concise yet comprehensive. Uses a clear structure with trigger, alternatives, and constraints. No wasted words.

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?

Describes tool purpose, usage triggers, alternatives, constraints, and behavior. No output schema, but for a simple adjustment tool, the description is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (channel enum, delta integer range). Description adds value by reiterating the range and suggesting to prefer small amplitudes, but schema already provides basic semantics.

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 clearly states the tool adjusts channel strength without changing waveform, using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like change_wave and start by listing alternatives.

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?

Explicitly lists when to use (channel running, small steps, slight fallback) and when not to (waveform change → change_wave; channel not started → start). Also provides usage constraints like max 2 calls per round and preference for small amplitude.

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