configure_waveform

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'metadata/cache' configuration and a size-dependent behavior (metadata-only for large files), but does not disclose if the operation is destructive, requires permissions, or what side effects occur. The information 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, second sentence adds critical usage distinction. Every word earns its place. No redundancy or verbosity.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values. It covers file type, behavior for large files, and an alternative tool. However, with many sibling tools, it only distinguishes from build_index, leaving some context gaps for an agent.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond the schema descriptions (e.g., rebuild, cache_dir). It gives general context about configuration but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 verb 'Configure' and resource 'metadata/cache for a .vcd or .vcd.gz waveform'. It distinguishes from sibling 'build_index' by noting that large files are metadata-only, providing a clear differentiation.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance for large files ('metadata-only; use build_index for expensive indexing'). However, it does not address other siblings, leaving some ambiguity about when to use this tool versus others like changes or waveform_info.

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