np_send_trigger

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'execute uploaded StimParams' but does not specify whether the tool is read-only or destructive, what happens on repeats, potential side effects (e.g., affecting ongoing experiments), or error states. The agent is left guessing about operational impact.

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?

A single, well-constructed sentence that front-loads the key purpose and mechanism. However, it could benefit from additional structure (e.g., a second sentence for usage notes) without being verbose. Every phrase earns its place.

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 tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is minimal. It omits prerequisites (e.g., how to upload StimParams), expected return values (e.g., success confirmation), and error conditions. Given the complexity of the domain (neurostimulation), the agent needs more detail to use the tool correctly.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters, but the description adds value by explaining that triggers 'execute uploaded StimParams' and that the array is 16-bit. This gives meaning beyond the schema's raw integer range, clarifying the domain-specific purpose of the parameters.

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 fires triggers to execute uploaded StimParams via a 16-bit trigger array. It uses specific verbs ('fire') and resources ('trigger(s)'), and the context of being part of NeuroPlatform v2 helps distinguish from general trigger tools, though sibling differentiation is not explicit.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like np_query_triggers or np_configure_stim. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., StimParams must be uploaded) or scenarios where this tool is appropriate. The description lacks when-not or alternative references.

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