arb_set_polarity

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It indicates a mutation ('Set') but does not disclose side effects, prerequisites, or failure behavior. This is sparse but not contradictory.

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 clear operation sentence followed by a compact argument list. No filler and the most important constraint values 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 two-parameter setter with an output schema available, the description covers both required values and their meanings. Missing lock of preconditions/error expectations is minor for this tool.

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 descriptions for either parameter. The description compensates fully by specifying allowed values: channel is 1 or 2, and polarity is 'NOR' or 'INVT'. This is exactly the call-control information an agent needs.

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 exactly the operation (set) and resource (output polarity on the waveform generator). None of the arb_* sibling tools mentions polarity, so it is clearly distinguishable.

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 vs alternatives, no preconditions, and no exclusions. The description simply states what it does without giving an agent context for choosing it over other arb_* setters.

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