cmw_bt_set_frequency

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 only states that it sets a frequency, but does not disclose whether this is a write operation, whether it requires a connection, or whether it has side effects on other measurement settings. This is minimal for a mutating 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 sentence with no filler words, making it concise and easy to parse. However, it is very terse and omits necessary context, sacrificing informational completeness for brevity.

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 four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It does not state the expected workflow (e.g., configure BT first, then set frequency, then trigger), explain host/port, or note any constraints. The presence of many sibling frequency setters makes this even more important.

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 already has descriptions for frequency_hz and meas_instance, and the description merely repeats the unit in Hz without adding new meaning. Host and port parameters lack schema descriptions, and the description does not explain them either. Thus, the description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 'Set Bluetooth measurement frequency in Hz' uses a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('Bluetooth measurement frequency'), with 'Bluetooth' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like cmw_gen_set_frequency and cmw_wlan_set_frequency. However, it does not explicitly contrast with cmw_meas_set_frequency, so it is clear but not fully differentiating.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cmw_bt_configure or cmw_meas_set_frequency, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The only implicit hint is the 'Bluetooth' in the name/description, which is not enough to guide selection among the many similar frequency-setting tools.

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