acq_single

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It notes the need for confirmation (implying disruptiveness) and describes the single-shot nature. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like resetting previous configurations or behavior if already armed.

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 concise sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second provides usage guidance. No redundant or irrelevant information. Well front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The description covers the primary use case and prerequisite. An output schema exists, so return values are handled. It could be more complete by mentioning error conditions or additional context, but it is sufficient for a simple 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?

The only parameter, confirm, is fully described in the schema (safety gate, must be True). The description merely restates 'Needs confirm=True', adding no new meaning. With 100% schema coverage, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Arm a single-shot acquisition: capture one trigger then stop.' It distinguishes from siblings like acq_run and acq_stop by specifying single-shot behavior and pairing with set_trigger for one-off transients.

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?

Explicitly mentions prerequisite 'Needs confirm=True' and recommends pairing with set_trigger for transient capture. While it doesn't explicitly exclude alternative scenarios, the use case is well-defined and the guidance is practical.

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