agilent33500b_configure_burst

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

With all annotations set to false, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It doesn't describe side effects, device state changes, or constraints like whether the instrument must be connected or if gated mode requires specific polarity. It only loosely implies that configuration changes are applied.

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 redundancy, making it concise and front-loaded. However, given the tool's complexity (7 parameters), the brevity veers toward under-specification rather than efficient clarity, but it still earns a high score for structure.

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?

The tool has 7 parameters with no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no parameter details in the description. The one-sentence description is inadequate to fully understand the tool's purpose, parameters, and effects, especially in a device-control context where output schema is present but not described.

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 minimal meaning beyond the parameter names by hinting that 'mode' can be 'triggered' or 'gated' and that 'source' likely refers to trigger_source. However, it doesn't explain cycles, period_s, gate_polarity, phase_degrees, or how these parameters interact. With 0% schema coverage, this is insufficient.

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 tool configures burst parameters and their source for the Agilent 33500B, distinguishing it from sibling configure tools like configure_pulse or configure_sweep. It specifies the burst mode scope ('triggered or gated') and mentions the source, though it doesn't elaborate on what 'source' specifically refers to.

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 other configuration tools, such as set_mode_enabled or configure_sweep. It doesn't mention prerequisites, typical workflow, or whether this should be called before enabling burst.

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