cmw_get_external_attenuation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool reads a 'declared' value (vs. measured), which is useful context, but it does not explicitly state that it is read-only or describe side effects or return format. The transparency is adequate but not rich.

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 two short sentences that each serve a purpose: the first states what the tool does, the second gives usage guidance. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary 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?

For a simple getter with two standard parameters and no output schema, the description effectively covers the tool's purpose and when to use it. It could be more complete by indicating the return format or units, but the current description is sufficient for the tool's simplicity.

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%, and the description does not explain the host and port parameters at all. While they are standard connection parameters, the description adds no semantics beyond the schema, so it fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 function with a specific verb ('Report') and precisely identifies the resource ('external attenuation' for 'generator and analyser paths'). It is well-differentiated from the sibling setter tool 'cmw_set_external_attenuation' and other general getters.

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 gives explicit guidance: 'Check this before trusting any absolute power measurement.' This clearly indicates when to use the tool, though it does not name specific alternatives or conditions when not to use it.

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