set_dyn_notch_q

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the effect (narrowness of notches) and includes practical limits (max useful value ~1000) and default (300). However, it does not mention side effects, persistence, or whether reconnection is required.

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 a single efficient sentence with a bracketed format note. It is front-loaded with purpose and provides all necessary information without extra words.

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 simple parameter setter with no output schema, the description covers the action, parameter meaning, tuning advice, and valid range. It is nearly complete, though it lacks prerequisites or persistence details.

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 type and range. The description adds tuning guidance and a practical upper bound, which is valuable beyond the schema's basic description.

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 action 'Set' and the resource 'dyn_notch_q', and explains it as 'Q factor — narrowness of each notch'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_dyn_notch_q or set_dyn_notch_count.

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 provides tuning guidance ('Increase until the resonance just stays within the notch, then stop') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like set_dyn_notch_count or set_dyn_notch_min_hz.

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