measure_item

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 notes the return value and that show_on_screen adds the item to the scope display, plus source requirements for delay/phase items. It omits error handling, state persistence, and interaction with other measurement or display tools.

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?

Front-loads the core action in the first sentence, then organizes parameter details into short lines. The long item list is necessary because the schema has no enum values, and the text is not padded.

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?

Given no annotations and an output schema for return values, the description covers item/source/show_on_screen well enough. It still leaves source2 semantics and sibling selection guidance incomplete for a 4-parameter measurement tool.

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 so substantially. It enumerates all 44 item values, defines acceptable source values, and explains show_on_screen. It only weakly covers source2 and does not clarify requirement conditions for non-delay/phase items.

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: measure one of 44 named items and return its current value. It does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like measure_quick, measure_batch, or measure_statistics_item, so it falls short of a 5.

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 parameter prerequisites for delay/phase items and explains show_on_screen behavior, which implies how to use the tool. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance versus sibling measurement tools.

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