dmm_trigger

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals the action type but not behavioral consequences: whether the trigger is synchronous, whether the device must be armed, or any side effects on pending measurements. This is thin for a state-changing operation.

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 sentence that states the action and target with no filler. Every word contributes to the meaning.

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 parameterless trigger action, the description is largely sufficient: an agent knows what the tool does and what to invoke. However, it omits prerequisites like trigger source configuration, which a more complete context would include.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the empty input schema is complete. The description adds no parameter-specific information but none is needed; the baseline of 4 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('Send'), resource ('software trigger'), and target ('multimeter'). It is clear enough to distinguish from instrument configuration tools like dmm_set_trigger_source, though it does not explicitly mention the analogous osc_force_trigger sibling.

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. It does not mention relationships to dmm_set_trigger_source, dmm_read/fetch, or when a software trigger is appropriate in a measurement workflow.

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