cmw_lte_meas_fetch_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It lists the data to be fetched (power, EVM, ACLR, SEM) but does not mention any prerequisites (e.g., measurement configuration/trigger), return format, or error behavior. The description adds minimal context beyond the basic fetch action.

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, focused sentence that immediately communicates the tool's function and scope. There is no redundant wording, and the key information is front-loaded, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description needs to provide comprehensive context. It only covers the basic purpose and leaves out parameter semantics, usage conditions, and result details, making it insufficient for reliable tool invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate by explaining the parameters. The description does not mention 'host' or 'port' at all, leaving these parameters entirely undefined. This is a critical gap for an agent to understand how to invoke the tool.

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 specifies the action ('Fetch') and the resource ('all LTE measurement results'), and it enumerates the measurement types (power, EVM, ACLR, SEM). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cmw_lte_meas_fetch_power, cmw_lte_meas_fetch_evm, etc., making the purpose highly clear.

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 use case is implied by the word 'all' – this is for retrieving all LTE measurement types in one call. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over individual fetch tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The guidance is inferred rather than stated.

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