uad_peek_meters

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It reveals that this is a one-shot read (single sample, no polling) and that at-floor channels are explicitly flagged. While edge cases like invalid targets aren't covered, the key behavioral traits are clear for a read-only 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 extremely concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the core function, then usage guidance and exclusions. No redundant words.

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?

With an output schema present, return value details are unnecessary. The description covers purpose, usage context, alternatives, and basic scope. The only gap is explicit parameter semantics, but that is partially covered in parameter_semantics. Overall, sufficient for an agent to decide when to use it.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It implicitly maps 'named subset' to the targets parameter and 'at-floor' to the above_db threshold, but does not explicitly explain the device or kind parameters. Partial compensation only.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'One-shot meter read (level, peak, clip) for all channels or a named subset'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools, especially by naming uad_watch_meters as the alternative for polling.

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 provides explicit 'Use when' conditions (checking signal arrival or hot channel) and a 'Not for' exclusion with a named alternative (uad_watch_meters), making selection and invocation guidance clear.

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