np_configure_stim

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'validate & upload' but does not explain behaviors such as what happens on validation failure, whether the upload persists or overwrites existing configurations, or if any side effects occur. This leaves significant ambiguity for a configuration tool.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the platform (NeuroPlatform v2) and core action (Define, validate & upload). It contains no filler and conveys the essential purpose efficiently.

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?

This is a complex tool with 11 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The one-sentence description does not cover important contextual aspects such as return values, device prerequisites, or behavior after upload. While the schema helps, the description itself is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's operational context.

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 82%, so the schema already documents most parameters (e.g., phase durations, amplitudes, charge-balance enforcement). The description adds minimal parameter context beyond the phrase 'charge-balanced biphasic stimulation', which is related but does not explain individual parameters or their interactions.

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 identifies the tool's function: 'Define, validate & upload a StimParam'. It uses specific verbs (define, validate, upload) and a specific resource (StimParam) with additional context (charge-balanced biphasic stimulation), distinguishing it from sibling tools like np_send_trigger or np_query_spike_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?

No explicit usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it name any sibling tools or prerequisites. It only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and description.

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