definir_secuencia_cero_transformador

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a valuable behavioral constraint—no silent Z0=Z1 assumption and no silent projection to OpenDSS—which is more than many mutation tools provide. But it omits mutation side effects (e.g., what workspace state is changed), required permissions, behavior when data is missing, and any return characteristics. The single behavioral guarantee is useful but incomplete.

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, front-loaded sentence that wastes no words. It efficiently conveys the core action and a critical behavioral caveat. Every part of the sentence earns its place.

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?

For a tool with 12 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is far too sparse. It lacks parameter semantics, explicit usage guidelines, and most behavioral details an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly. It provides only a high-level purpose and one constraint.

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% across 12 parameters, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning. It does not explain what uk0_percent, ur0_percent, leakage_share_hv, magnetizing_z0_ratio_percent, or any other parameter represents or how they interact. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 names a specific verb ('Registra') and resource ('datos Z0 de transformador'), and the added clause 'sin asumir Z0=Z1 ni proyectarlos silenciosamente a OpenDSS' distinguishes it from sibling tools like definir_secuencia_cero_fuente and definir_secuencia_cero_linea. An agent can tell this is the transformer zero-sequence registration tool without opening the schema.

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 implies when to use it: when you have actual Z0 data and want to avoid assumptions or silent projection to OpenDSS. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as obtener_secuencia_cero or the other definir_secuencia_cero_* tools, nor does it list prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied.

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