cmw_wlan_set_expected_power

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

No annotations are available, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the operation and value type, but it does not disclose side effects, prerequisites (e.g., connection status or configured WLAN signal), persistence of settings, or response behavior. This is insufficient for a mutation 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, front-loaded sentence. It is free of redundancy and every word contributes to the core purpose, 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?

For a 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, a one-sentence description is insufficient. It leaves gaps such as prerequisites, whether the setting affects the current measurement instance or persists across calls, and how host/port are used. The description is not complete enough for reliable 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 coverage is only 50% (power_dbm and meas_instance have descriptions; host and port do not). The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond repeating 'dBm' for power_dbm, and it does not clarify the roles of host/port or meas_instance. With low coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not.

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 WLAN expected input power in dBm' clearly states the action (set), the resource (expected input power), and the unit (dBm). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like cmw_bt_set_expected_power and cmw_meas_set_expected_power via the explicit 'WLAN' qualifier.

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 implies usage for WLAN-related configurations, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cmw_bt_set_expected_power or cmw_meas_set_expected_power. No exclusions or alternative references are provided, leaving the context as 'implied' rather than clearly guided.

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