m8811_measure

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which aligns with the 'Measure' description. The description adds the list of measurable quantities but does not disclose behavioral traits such as return format, units, or whether a measurement triggers a new acquisition. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

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 of 12 words that is front-loaded with the verb 'Measure.' It is concise and every word contributes to conveying the tool's scope. No redundant or filler content.

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 low complexity (one optional parameter), existing output schema, and read-only annotations, the description is mostly complete. It enumerates the supported measurement types, which is essential for an agent to decide usage. However, it omits expansion of abbreviations like 'DVM' and 'DRM' and does not clarify whether 'amp-hours' requires a specific setup or timeframe, leaving minor gaps.

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 has one optional parameter ('measurement') with a default of 'vcm' and no description (0% coverage). The description partially compensates by listing possible measurement types (voltage, current, DVM, combined VCM, amp-hours, DRM resistance), but it does not explicitly map these values to the 'measurement' parameter or explain the default. This adds some meaning but leaves ambiguity.

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's function: 'Measure voltage, current, DVM, combined VCM, amp-hours, or DRM resistance.' It uses a specific verb ('Measure') and identifies the resource (m8811) and the scope (multiple measurement types). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like m8811_set_voltage or m8811_query_scpi.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention m8811_query_scpi, m8811_get_settings, or any other tool that could also retrieve readings. The only implied usage is 'when you want to measure one of these quantities,' but no exclusions or alternative comparisons are given.

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