get_bode_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that values are 'engineered' (booleans, floats in Hz/V, int points per decade) and that ref_in/ref_out come back in short form (CHAN1..4). This is meaningful behavioral context about return value formatting. It doesn't, however, describe side effects or whether reading changes state.

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 reasonably short and front-loaded with the purpose. However, the parenthetical manual reference and the parenthetical form note interrupt flow, and the second sentence mixes parameter explanation with return-value explanation.

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-value format need not be fully explained. The description covers the parameter and some return formatting. But with 0% schema coverage for the parameter and no annotations, more context on the parameter's effect and any usage constraints would be expected.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does explain voltage_range selects the frequency range for :BODeplot:VOLTage? and lists the enum-like values, which is helpful. However, the schema shows anyOf string/integer/number with a default, and the description's numeric forms note is vague. The description adds only partial meaning for the single parameter.

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 (read back) and a specific resource (the full Bode plot configuration), with a manual section reference. The sibling set has get_bode_config, get_awg_config, etc., and this clearly identifies its scope as the complete Bode configuration.

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 (read the full configuration) but doesn't state when to use this versus a hypothetical set_bode_config or other configuration-read tools. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are provided.

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