render_spectrogram

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states the output is an image but does not mention read-only nature, whether it is destructive, what happens if source data is not available, or any side effects. The default parameter 'source' (last_loaded) implies reliance on prior state but is not explained.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose and key parameters. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not explain return values, error conditions, or relationships to sibling tools like 'compute_fft' (which provides raw spectrum data) or 'render_waterfall' (similar visualization). Prerequisites (e.g., loaded IQ data) are implied by default but not stated.

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 meaning for three parameters (n_fft as frame size, hop_length as hop, dynamic_range_db as dB dynamic range) but omits 'window' and 'source'. With 0% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but is incomplete, missing details on valid values or units.

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 it produces an STFT spectrogram image and lists key configurable parameters (frame size, hop, dB range). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'render_waterfall', which is also a visualization tool.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'render_waterfall' or 'compute_fft'. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., need to load data first) or conditions where this tool is appropriate.

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