spoolman_measure_spool

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It clarifies the input unit (grams) and that the weight includes the spool, but it does not disclose that the calculation likely depends on the spool's empty weight or any side effects. This is a moderate gap.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and input. There is no wasted wording, making it highly concise and structurally efficient.

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 simple two-parameter mutation tool, the description provides adequate information to understand the core operation. However, it lacks details about prerequisites (like knowing the spool's empty weight) and potential effects, so it is not fully complete given the absence of annotations.

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 input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (id and weight), achieving 100% coverage. The description only repeats the weight unit and spool+filament concept without adding new meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 updates a spool's remaining filament using a weight measurement, with the specific scope of 'spool + filament together in grams.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like spoolman_update_spool by focusing on measurement-based updates.

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 implies the use case: to update remaining filament when a physical weight measurement is available. It offers clear context but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, falling short of the 'explicit when/when-not' bar.

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