Sa Sweep

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses one useful trait — that single blocks and returns when the sweep is complete — but says nothing about continuous or wait behavior, whether the call is blocking, whether it disrupts an in-progress acquisition, or any permission/rate considerations.

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?

It is very brief, which is good, but the lead fragment "Run control." is low-value filler and the one informative sentence is buried after it. Nothing is padded, but the front-loading is weak.

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, for a two-parameter control tool with zero annotations, the description omits essential behavioral context (blocking semantics for the other modes, interaction with ongoing measurements), leaving the agent under-informed.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (action values and sweeps). The description adds only marginal clarification about the single action's completion semantics, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

"Run control" is a vague categorization rather than a specific verb+resource; the description never plainly states that the tool drives/starts a sweep acquisition. It only partially clarifies one mode (single) rather than the tool's overall purpose, and does nothing to distinguish it from siblings like sa_measure, sa_status, or sa_configure.

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 when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. The reader cannot tell from this text when to pick sa_sweep over sa_measure or sa_status, nor when continuous versus wait is appropriate beyond the terse schema notes.

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