aedt_create_frequency_sweep

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, permissions, or what happens if a sweep already exists. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action. However, it is overly brief for the tool's complexity, which limits its helpfulness. It earns its place but could benefit from slightly more detail.

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 three parameters with zero schema descriptions and no annotations, the description is too sparse. Even with an output schema present, the description does not explain return values, parameter usage, or prerequisites. It is not complete enough for reliable agent 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%, requiring the description to add meaning. It adds context for sweep_kind by listing examples, but args and kwargs remain completely unexplained. The description only partially compensates for the schema deficiency.

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 creates a frequency sweep and provides specific examples of sweep kinds, making the purpose evident. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling creation tools like create_setup or create_report, leaving differentiation to the tool name.

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 examples (linear_count, linear_step, single_point) imply when to use the tool for creating frequency sweeps of those types, but no explicit guidance is given about when not to use it or alternatives. The usage context is implied by the tool name and description.

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