set_channel

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the partial update behavior ('Only the arguments you pass are changed; omit any to leave it as-is'), which is a key behavioral trait. It does not mention side effects or error conditions, but the partial update disclosure is valuable.

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 sentences: the first states the purpose, the second explains partial update and use case. Every sentence is essential with no fluff, and the main action is front-loaded.

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 purpose, partial update behavior, and a typical use case. It does not explain return values (output schema exists), nor error conditions. Given the moderate complexity and available schema, it is fairly complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context by grouping parameters under 'vertical configuration' and clarifying partial update, but it does not add meaning beyond the schema's detailed parameter descriptions.

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 sets a channel's vertical configuration (enable, V/div, offset, coupling). It distinguishes from sibling tools like acq_configure and set_timebase by specifying the resource (channel) and the specific configuration parameters.

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?

The description explains that only passed arguments are changed (partial update) and suggests using it to fit a signal on screen before measuring or capturing. This provides context but does not explicitly exclude alternative tools.

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