inject_spikes

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits, side effects, or safety considerations. With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden, but it provides zero information beyond the name.

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?

At two words, the description is too brief to be useful. Conciseness is valued, but not at the cost of omitting essential information. Every sentence should earn its place; here there is no sentence at all.

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 complexity of neural simulation and the lack of output schema or annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to inform the agent about return values, behavioral effects, or how this tool fits into the larger system.

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%, and the description does not explain what neuronIds or strength represent. The default value for strength is given but without context (e.g., units, meaning of negative values).

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 a tautology of the tool name, providing no additional clarity. It fails to specify what injecting spikes entails (e.g., into which model or circuit) and does not differentiate from sibling tools like np_send_trigger or np_configure_stim.

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 vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or conditions where this tool should be avoided.

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