Sets the PPK2 source voltage in millivolts (800–5000) to power a DUT or define VDD for current conversion; values outside the range are clamped automatically.
设置电压(mV,800-5000,域外自动夹紧)。
SOURCE 模式:稳压器实际输出;AMPERE 模式:作为电流换算的 VDD 估计值。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| millivolts | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose important behavior: the 800-5000 mV range and that out-of-range values are automatically clamped rather than rejected. It stops short of noting permissions, persistence, or interaction with mode 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?
Two tight lines with the range and clamping front-loaded, then the mode-dependent interpretation. Every sentence carries information; only the mode clause is slightly terse and could be clearer.
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?
For a one-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers units, bounds, clamping, and mode-dependent effect, which is enough to call it correctly. It could note the dependency on set_mode having been invoked, but no critical information is missing.
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; it supplies the unit (mV) and a concrete numeric range plus clamping semantics for the single parameter. That meaningfully exceeds the bare "integer" schema type.
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+resource ("设置电压" / set voltage) with units and valid range, so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like set_dut_power, but the resource and constraint set are unambiguous.
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?
Explains that meaning depends on the active mode (SOURCE = actual regulator output, AMPERE = VDD estimate for current conversion), which is genuine usage context. However, it never says when to prefer this over alternatives or whether a mode must be set first, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.