measure_dc

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds the key behavioral context that the tool operates on operating point results, implying a prerequisite analysis. This goes beyond structured fields.

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 of 12 words, efficient and front-loaded. However, it partially repeats the tool name 'measure_dc' by starting with 'Measure the DC voltage...' which is slightly redundant.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description does not specify what the tool returns (e.g., a voltage value). It also does not mention the prerequisite of running a DC operating point analysis, which is critical for correct use. Two required parameters lack any additional 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?

With 0% schema coverage for parameters, the description does not explain the meaning of circuit_id or node_name. It only mentions 'specific node' without detailing how to specify it. The description should compensate but does not.

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 verb 'measure' and resource 'DC voltage at a specific node', distinguishing it from sibling tools like measure_bandwidth or measure_gain. The phrase 'from operating point results' provides specific context.

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?

The description implies that the tool should be used after an operating point analysis (e.g., run_dc_op), but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus other measurement tools, nor does it provide exclusions or alternatives.

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