engineering.bode_magnitude_phase

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: the exact transfer-function forms for each mode, scale-invariance (only the ratio ωc/ω is used), and 30-significant-digit precision. Return shape is covered by the output schema.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then formulas, then parameter constraints, then the misuse warning. Dense but every sentence adds necessary information with no padding.

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?

Covers purpose, both mode formulas, unit/type constraints, precision, and the key misuse case. An output schema exists to describe return values, so nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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%, so the description must carry all parameter meaning, and it does: mode's two accepted values are defined via formulas, corner_freq and frequency are specified as Decimal strings >0 in matching units (rad/s or Hz), and their ratio-only use is stated.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (compute Bode magnitude in dB and phase in degrees) and scopes it precisely to a first-order transfer function with a single pole or zero. The formulas for both modes make the operation unambiguous and clearly distinct from siblings like first_order_response or rc_filter_cutoff.

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?

Gives explicit usage context and a clear exclusion: transfer functions with multiple poles/zeros must be summed directly rather than passed here. It does not name a concrete sibling alternative, so it falls short of a full 5, but the 'when not to use' warning is present and actionable.

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