Set Wavelengths

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that existing wavelength definitions are replaced (destructive overwrite) and that a primary wavelength is selected, which is useful. However, it omits system-state prerequisites, reversibility, and other side effects.

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 wasted words. It states the action and its secondary effect efficiently.

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 four-parameter setter with no required arguments, no annotations, and no output schema, the one-line description is too terse. It does not guide the agent on legacy vs modern parameter pairs (wavelengthsUm/primary vs wavelengths/primaryWavelength) or default behavior, leaving significant ambiguity.

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 100%, so all four parameters, including the legacy/modern pairs, are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or semantics beyond mentioning 'primary wavelength'; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Replace') and resource ('wavelength definitions'), plus the secondary effect of selecting the primary wavelength. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling zemax_set_number_of_wavelengths, so it is clear but lacks sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives named. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Replace', which is insufficient for routing against the many other zemax_set_* tools.

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