autoscale

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool executes :AUToset and explains option effects, including that lock_timebase disables the AUTO function, but it does not state that autoscaling changes instrument state broadly, what happens to existing settings, or whether a connected instrument is required.

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 front-loaded with the main operation, then uses a compact parameter list. Most sentences earn their place, though the manual reference and some parenthetical details are slightly dense rather than optimally trimmed.

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 described. However, with no annotations, the description should carry more behavioral context than it does; it covers parameters and execution but omits side effects, prerequisites, and usage routing.

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, and it does document all five Boolean parameters with practical meanings. Four parameters explicitly map True/False behavior, while peak_search lacks a clear True/False mapping and null/default behavior is not explained.

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 operation: configure Autoset options and then execute :AUToset. This distinguishes it from siblings that only set or get Autoset options, because it actually performs the autoscale action. It could more explicitly name the sibling tool set_autoset_options as the configuration-only alternative.

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 explains what each option does but gives no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or comparison to alternatives such as set_autoset_options. An agent can infer it is for autoscaling with options, but there are no exclusions or alternative-routing statements.

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