agilent33500b_query_scpi

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds that the query must be documented by the manual and is non-destructive, reinforcing but not significantly extending the annotation-provided behavior. No additional detail on error handling or response behavior is given.

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, focused sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose without redundancy or irrelevant information. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no nested objects, annotations cover safety) and the presence of an output schema, the description is almost complete. However, it relies on the external 33500 Series manual for caller knowledge and omits practical details like whether the command should be a full SCPI query with a question mark, making it slightly less self-contained.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no additional semantics for the single 'command' parameter. It does not explain expected format (e.g., whether to include a question mark), valid examples, or how the manual relates to acceptable commands. The tool name and schema title only restate 'command'.

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 sends non-destructive SCPI queries documented by the 33500 Series manual. It uses a specific verb ('Send') and resource ('query'), and explicitly distinguishes from write operations by calling it non-destructive.

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 description conveys when to use this tool: for any non-destructive query documented by the manual. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives like write_scpi for commands, the term 'query' and the non-destructive constraint imply the intended scope versus sibling tools.

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