afg2125_set_sweep_enabled

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

Annotations provide no safety profile (readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false, etc.), so the description carries full responsibility. It adds the precondition about MAIN output being disabled, but does not explain what happens if that precondition is violated, nor any side effects or persistence behavior. This is a minimal but acceptable level of transparency for a simple setter.

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 a single sentence with no redundant words. It leads with the verb phrase and gives the essential condition, making it highly scannable and concise.

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 one-boolean-parameter tool, the description covers the purpose, parameter semantics, and the key precondition. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to document return values. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly, though it doesn't address error cases when MAIN output is enabled.

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 provides 0% description coverage for the single 'enabled' parameter. The description explicitly maps true to 'enable' and false to 'disable' via 'Enable or disable frequency sweep', thus fully compensating for the schema gap and giving the parameter clear meaning.

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 states a specific action ('Enable or disable frequency sweep') and includes a critical condition ('while MAIN output is disabled'), which not only clarifies the tool's function but differentiates it from sweep configuration tools like afg2125_configure_sweep and other set_enabled toggles.

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 phrase 'while MAIN output is disabled' provides a clear precondition for using this tool, implying it should only be called when the main output is off. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it loses a point for not naming when to use configure_sweep instead.

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