arb_set_fm

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the primary action and parameters, but does not disclose side effects such as whether enabling FM modulation modifies the currently selected waveform, overrides other modulation modes, or takes effect immediately on the output.

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 clear statement followed by a compact, well-formatted Args list. Every line earns its place, and the most important semantic details are front-loaded.

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 simple three-parameter configuration tool, the description and schema together provide the core invocation details. However, the lack of usage guidance and behavioral side-effect disclosure means an agent does not fully understand what happens to the instrument's output when FM is enabled, so the definition is adequate but not complete.

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 provides no property descriptions (0% coverage), but the description compensates by defining each parameter: channel is restricted to 1 or 2, deviation is in Hz, and frequency is in Hz. This gives the agent the units and channel constraint necessary to invoke the tool correctly, though numeric ranges or valid limits are not provided.

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 uses a specific verb ('Enable') and a clear resource ('FM modulation on the waveform generator'), which unambiguously distinguishes this from sibling tools like arb_set_am, arb_set_pm, and arb_set_sweep. It states exactly what action the tool performs without ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as arb_set_am, arb_set_pm, or arb_disable_modulation. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative routing are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name and sibling list.

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