run_measurement_command

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose whether commands mutate measurements, require permissions, or what side effects may occur. Since this is a 'raw' command runner capable of potentially destructive operations (e.g., 'Trim IR'), the lack of any warning or effect disclosure is a significant gap.

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?

The description is two concise sentences with no fluff. The main action is front-loaded, and every sentence adds necessary context without 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?

Despite rich schema documentation, the tool is an arbitrary raw command runner with no output schema and no annotations. The description does not cover return values, mutability, error scenarios, or risk, leaving the behavior largely opaque for a tool that can execute commands with varying effects.

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 100%, with each parameter described. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining where to discover command names and providing example commands ('Estimate IR delay'), helping the agent understand the 'command' parameter format.

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: 'Run a raw REW command on one measurement'. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning as an 'escape hatch' with concrete examples ('Trim IR to windows', 'Estimate IR delay').

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?

It explicitly frames when to use the tool ('Escape hatch for operations without a dedicated tool'), implying not to use it when a dedicated tool exists. It also gives discovery guidance (list_api_commands / the measurement's own command list), though it doesn't name specific alternative tools.

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