cst_array_taper_design

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

No annotations provided; description only states purpose. Does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects (e.g., modifying project state), return values, permissions, or integration steps. Significant gap for a design 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?

Two sentences, no fluff, efficiently communicates purpose and supported options. Front-loaded with verb and resource.

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?

Despite clear purpose, the description lacks details on output (no output schema), how the tool integrates into a workflow (e.g., does it modify the project or return weights?), and dependencies. Incomplete for practical agent usage.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. Description reiterates supported taper types, which are already in the enum, and notes that sidelobe_level_db is for Taylor/Chebyshev (also in schema). Adds minimal extra meaning.

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?

Explicitly states 'Design amplitude taper weights for sidelobe control', which is a specific verb-resource pair. Lists supported window types, distinguishing it from sibling array tools like beam steering or factor computation.

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?

Implies usage for designing tapers, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to siblings like cst_array_beam_steering. The list of supported types helps choose a taper, but lacks exclusionary context.

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