cmw_bt_configure

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply says 'Configure' without stating whether this is a mutating operation, whether it requires an active connection, what happens on conflicting parameters, or how it interacts with the measurement instance. This is a significant transparency gap for a configuration 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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. There is zero waste or redundancy, and the key action and target are immediately clear.

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 the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is too minimal. It lacks context about return values, prerequisite states, relationship to sibling setter tools, and potential side effects. This makes it incomplete for an agent to understand the full scope of the operation.

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 schema description coverage is 75%, with 6 of 8 parameters having descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Host and port lack descriptions, but the overall coverage is high enough that the description need not compensate extensively.

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 verb 'Configure' and the resource 'Bluetooth/BLE non-signaling measurement', which is specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like cmw_bt_set_technology or cmw_bt_set_frequency, so it lacks distinction from those more granular alternatives.

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 aggregate configuration tool versus the individual cmw_bt_set_* commands. The description does not mention any alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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