mhs5200_set_duty_cycle

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the setting primarily affects square waves, which is useful. However, it does not elaborate on side effects, required permissions, or behavior on invalid inputs beyond the schema's constraints.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a brief Args/Returns layout. Every sentence carries essential information, and the primary action is stated upfront. No wasted words.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple tool with a single nested parameter. It covers the action, effect, and return type. The annotations provide safety guarantees. Minor omission: no mention that the channel defaults to 1, though that is in the schema.

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 describes both parameters with titles and ranges. The tool description adds the crucial context that the duty cycle primarily affects square waves, which is beyond the schema's generic description. This extra semantic adds value.

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's purpose: 'Set the duty cycle for a channel'. It specifies the primary effect on square waves, which adds precision and distinguishes it from other set_ tools like set_amplitude or set_frequency.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when changing square wave duty cycle is appropriate. The usage is implied by the function name and context, but no when-not or alternative conditions are mentioned.

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