osc_get_timebase

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral transparency. 'Query' strongly implies a non-mutating read operation, which is useful, but the description does not disclose any further behavioral details such as error conditions or whether it reflects live instrument state.

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, direct, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the operation and resource.

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 zero-parameter getter with an output schema available, the description is nearly complete. It does not elaborate on the exact meaning of 'timebase setting' or return behavior, but those are largely covered by the output schema and the simplicity of the operation.

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 has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not a burden on the description. A baseline of 4 is appropriate because no parameter information is needed beyond the empty schema.

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 action ('Query') and the target resource ('current timebase setting on the oscilloscope'). It is instantly distinguishable from siblings like osc_set_timebase because it is explicitly a getter for the current value.

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 wording implies this is the tool to use when the current timebase setting is needed, and the 'current' qualifier contrasts with the setting counterpart. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions.

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