save_memory_waveform_on_instrument

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it does disclose concrete constraints beyond the schema: the SCPI command, the allowed suffixes (.bin, .csv, .wfm), and the 26-character filename cap. It omits error conditions, required run state, and whether the write overwrites an existing file.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then the concrete constraints. No filler or redundancy.

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 explanation is unnecessary. For a one-parameter save tool the description is nearly sufficient, missing only error/overwrite behavior and the exact path format.

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 partially by giving the path's suffix options and length limit. However, it does not state the path format (device directory, separators) needed to construct a valid value.

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 (Store) and resource (full-memory waveform) plus the destination (instrument's own storage) and the underlying SCPI command. It distinguishes itself somewhat by emphasizing the full-memory content, but it never names the close sibling save_waveform_on_instrument, so an agent must still infer the distinction.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of the near-identical save_waveform_on_instrument alternative. Only an implicit signal ('full-memory waveform') hints at when this variant applies.

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