osc_set_timebase

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states this is a set operation but does not mention side effects, instrument prerequisites, valid scale ranges, or whether the setting persists. A mutation tool with no annotation coverage needs more behavioral context.

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 front-loaded, with one clear sentence followed by a minimal argument definition. Every element earns its place and no redundant wording is present.

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 single-parameter setter with an output schema, the description provides the essential invocation details: target resource, action, and parameter units. It is slightly incomplete only in lacking range or side-effect details, which are less critical for this low-complexity 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 input schema only declares 'scale' as a number with 0% description coverage. The tool description compensates by defining 'scale' as 'Time per division in seconds,' adding units and physical meaning that are absent from the 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Set the horizontal timebase (s/div) on the oscilloscope.' It clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from the sibling getter osc_get_timebase by the setter action.

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 description makes the use case clear: change the oscilloscope's horizontal timebase. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the setter nature and the sibling osc_get_timebase make the intended usage obvious.

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