vna_set_marker

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 only states the core action without disclosing whether this is a mutating operation, requires prior connection, or affects the instrument's display. There is no mention of side effects or error conditions.

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 with no waste. However, it is under-specified, missing important contextual information. It is concise but not sufficiently informative for a standalone description.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It fails to provide context about connection requirements, return values, or how the marker positioning relates to the sweep. The description only covers the minimal idea, leaving significant gaps for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 50%, with host and port lacking descriptions. The description adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides for frequency_hz and marker_num. It does not explain the purpose of host and port, leaving these parameters under-specified.

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 uses a specific verb 'Position' and resource 'marker', making it clear that this tool sets the marker's frequency. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like vna_get_marker (read) and marker search tools (which find min/max). However, it could be slightly more explicit about the 'set' action.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as vna_marker_search_min or vna_get_marker. There is no mention of prerequisites like being connected to a VNA or needing an active sweep. The usage context is only implied.

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