set_timebase

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does add real value: it says the tool returns configuration, provides instrument-specific edge-offset formulas, and corrects the assumption that trigger level must be zero. It does not cover side effects or prerequisites, but it reveals meaningful behavior beyond the schema.

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?

Three sentences with the primary action front-loaded. The second and third sentences add relevant behavioral and usage detail without repeating the schema. A couple of phrases are terse, but there is no filler.

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 two-optional-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers operation, return value, and edge behavior. Missing pieces include valid value ranges, behavior when parameters are omitted, and a clearer explanation of zoom/noncentral references in relation to this 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds semantic context by relating scale_s_div to horizontal scale and window-edge offset calculations, and by clarifying the nature of offset_s as a trigger offset. It does not add ranges or format guidance, but it enriches the two parameters beyond the bare schema descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Set horizontal scale/offset; return configuration.' This clearly identifies it as the timebase configuration tool and distinguishes it from sibling setters like set_channel and set_trigger. It does not explicitly name an alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage context is implied rather than explicit: the tool sets horizontal scale and offset, and the note about 'zoom/noncentral references' gives task-oriented guidance. However, it never states when to prefer this tool over siblings, whether it is only for timebase changes, or when it should not be used.

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