dmm_set_nplc

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool sets and does not mention valid ranges, device requirements, side effects, error conditions, or whether the setting affects subsequent measurements. This is thin coverage for a configuration mutation tool.

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 and efficient: one sentence defines the operation and one line documents the parameter. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 one-parameter setter, the description is mostly adequate, and an output schema exists so return-value details are not required. However, it omits valid range constraints, the effect of the setting, and any prerequisites or behavioral caveats, which leaves gaps for an agent operating without annotations.

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 input schema only says 'nplc' is a number, but the description adds meaning by explaining it as the NPLC value in power line cycles and gives concrete examples. This helps the agent understand what value to pass, though it stops short of specifying valid bounds or discrete allowed values.

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 specific action: setting the integration time in number of power line cycles on the multimeter. It names both the resource (multimeter) and the setting (NPLC), making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like dmm_set_resolution or dmm_set_range.

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 intended use is implied by the description: use this tool when you need to configure the DMM's integration time. However, no explicit guidance is given about when to prefer this over related settings such as dmm_set_resolution, nor are any alternative tools or exclusions mentioned.

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