np_send_trigger

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not explain side effects, safety, reversibility, permissions, or what happens when triggers are fired (e.g., hardware activation). This is a significant gap for a tool that likely has physical or system-level consequences.

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 sentence and concise, but it uses jargon ('NeuroPlatform v2', 'StimParams', '16-bit trigger array') that might reduce clarity. It is not verbose, and every word adds some information, though the structure could be improved by separating context from action.

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?

The tool has a simple schema but no output schema and no annotations. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the full context: it lacks return behavior, side effects, prerequisites, and integration with sibling tools. For a trigger-sending tool, this is a notable gap.

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 description covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions for 'repeats' and 'triggers'. The description adds the context of 'uploaded StimParams' and '16-bit trigger array', which gives some extra meaning, but the schema already provides sufficient parameter documentation. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and executes uploaded StimParams via a 16-bit trigger array, using specific verbs like 'fire' and 'execute'. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings, the purpose is understandable, though the meaning of 'execute uploaded StimParams' could be clearer for an agent.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like np_configure_stim or np_query_triggers. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., StimParams must be uploaded first) or when not to use it. The context is implied but not stated.

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