autoscale

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool changes settings, waits for completion, returns state, and does not retry automatically. This covers the main behavioral expectations for a zero-parameter action, though it does not mention potential failures or timeouts.

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. The first sentence states the action and its effects, and the second sentence clarifies key exclusions, with no redundant or filler text.

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 action with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: what is changed, that it waits, what it returns, and that it does not retry or reset. It could be more explicit about prerequisites or return-state details, but it is reasonably complete for this tool's simplicity.

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 and the schema is empty, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter documentation is needed.

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 names the action (autoscale/auto-setup) and specifies what it affects: channels, timebase, and trigger. It also distinguishes itself from capability discovery and factory reset, which helps separate it from sibling tools like get_capabilities.

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 implies this tool is for automatically configuring acquisition settings and waiting for completion, but it does not explicitly state when to choose autoscale over alternatives such as set_channel, set_timebase, or set_trigger. It provides exclusions rather than positive selection criteria.

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