arb_disable_modulation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the action without covering side effects, whether modulation settings are reset, or any instrument prerequisites. It also leaves 'all modulation' undefined in terms of which specific modulation modes are affected.

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 compact, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no unnecessary filler. The argument documentation is minimal but directly useful.

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 single-parameter command with an output schema available, the description gives the core action and channel range. Still, it lacks clarity on exactly which modulation modes are disabled and any side effects, so an agent may not fully understand the tool's scope without additional inference.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it does by explaining that channel is 1 or 2. This adds the key constraint beyond the bare integer schema, though it omits details like error behavior or whether channel is 1-indexed.

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?

States a specific action ('Disable all modulation') and resource ('waveform generator channel'), so the agent understands the core operation. It does not explicitly enumerate which modulation types are included (AM/FM/PM vs sweep/burst), leaving slight ambiguity against sibling disable tools.

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 when to use the tool: when all modulation on a channel should be turned off. However, it provides no explicit when-not-to-use guidance and does not differentiate itself from arb_disable_sweep or arb_disable_burst.

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