cst_configure_eigenmode_advanced

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it is a configuration tool and mentions parameters, but does not disclose any side effects, whether it modifies global state, or if it is destructive. For a 'configure' action, basic behavioral expectations are not communicated.

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?

Two concise sentences: first defines the tool, second provides application context. No filler or redundancy. Front-loaded with purpose.

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 configuration tool with 4 parameters, the description covers the key differentiators (advanced, higher-order, fine control). It omits return values but no output schema exists. With sibling tools, the advanced focus is clear. Slightly lacking in behavioral context, but adequate overall.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'mode count, frequency targeting, and solver order' which map to parameters, but adds minimal interpretive value beyond the 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 clearly states this is for 'Advanced eigenmode solver configuration' and lists specific applications (waveguide, cavity, filter) that require 'fine control over mode count, frequency targeting, and solver order.' While it distinguishes from a basic solver, it does not explicitly name the sibling tool 'cst_configure_eigenmode_solver' for contrast.

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 contexts for use: 'waveguide mode analysis, cavity resonator design, and filter characterization where fine control...needed.' This implies when to prefer this advanced version over a basic solver, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools.

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