set_phase

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is already covered. The description adds the normalized range and a readback behavior, which is useful context, but does not explain what is destructive, whether the change is reversible, or what the readback returns.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that packs purpose, range, and readback without wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool.

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 one-parameter mutation, the description covers purpose, value range, and readback, while annotations handle the destructive safety profile. It stops short of explaining the readback output or the operational context of inter-channel phase, but no output schema exists and the remaining gaps are minor.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so well for the single parameter by specifying the normalized range 0..359.9 degrees, implying units and precision; it does not clarify accepted fractional values or wrap-around behavior, but it adds substantial meaning beyond the bare 'phase_deg' schema field.

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?

States a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('inter-channel phase'), making the tool's function unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish this from sibling tools like set_power or configure_channel, so an agent gets no routing signal beyond the resource name.

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?

Provides no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and does not mention any alternatives or prerequisites. The agent must infer that this is the tool for phase adjustments from the purpose alone.

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