inject_spikes

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. The minimal description does not indicate whether the tool is destructive, requires permissions, has side effects, or affects the system state. It fails to provide any behavioral context.

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?

While extremely short, the description sacrifices necessary detail. It is under-specified rather than concise; every sentence should earn its place, but here there is only one sentence that adds no value.

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?

Given the tool has two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate. It provides no context about return values, side effects, or when to use the tool, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 0%, but the description offers no explanation of the parameters (neuronIds, strength). It adds no meaning beyond the schema itself, leaving the agent to guess their purpose and constraints.

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 'Spike Injection' is essentially a tautology of the tool name, providing no specific verb or resource. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like np_count_spikes or np_query_spike_events, which also deal with spikes.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or what differentiates it from other spike-related tools.

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