Export waveform to a file

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

The description does add real behavioral context beyond the annotations: the export is full-resolution (no downsample) and the CSV columns are t_s, v. However, it explicitly states the tool writes a file to disk, which sits in tension with readOnlyHint=true (a filesystem write is an environment modification); overwrite behavior, path/directory requirements, and permissions are not covered. The write disclosure is honest, but the description and annotations pull in different directions.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, followed by output format then routing guidance. No filler and no repetition of schema or annotation content.

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 need not be explained, and the routing guidance is complete. Still, for a 5-parameter export tool with 40% schema coverage, the undefined dialect/resource parameters and the disk-write semantics (overwrite, path expectations) leave gaps an agent must guess at.

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 40%, and the two undocumented parameters (dialect, resource) get no explanation in the description either. 'Fetch a channel trace' only loosely implies the channel parameter, and nothing clarifies how fmt interacts with the path suffix or what dialect/resource control. The description does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 ('Fetch a channel trace and write the full record ... to disk') with the key scoping qualifier 'no downsample'. It explicitly names the sibling it is not (scope_capture_waveform) and characterizes that sibling's role, so an agent can separate the two without opening either schema.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('Use this for archives') and names the alternative with its own condition ('scope_capture_waveform is for a short preview in the chat'). Nothing about tool selection is left to inference.

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