Plecs Scope

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it says nothing about side effects, whether ClearTraces is destructive, whether SaveTraces/LoadTraces touch the filesystem, or what permissions are needed. Only the command names hint at mutating behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized, though that brevity comes partly from omitting needed information rather than from tight writing.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, but for a tool with five distinct commands and an opaque 'argument' parameter, the description is far too thin. Nothing explains what each command expects in 'argument' or what state the scope ends up in.

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 0% and there are no enums, so the description's command list is the only documentation of valid command values, which is genuinely valuable. However, 'scope_path' and 'argument' are left completely unexplained — what an argument means per command is critical and absent.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Send a command to a scope') and enumerates the supported commands, so the agent knows this is a scope-control entry point. It does not differentiate from nearby siblings such as plecs_plot or plecs_capture, which also touch trace/plot data.

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 indication of when to use this versus alternatives, nor which command applies to which situation (e.g., when to HoldTrace vs SaveTraces). The reader must infer usage entirely from the command names.

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