Configure JS220 frontend

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

Annotations already indicate not read-only, not destructive, and idempotent. The description adds that it configures modes and suggests auto for normal use, but does not detail side effects, prerequisites, or behavior of other parameters.

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 a single concise sentence without fluff. However, it could include more information about the undocumented parameters without violating conciseness.

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?

With 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and a modest description, the tool is incomplete. The description only covers two parameters, and the presence of an output schema does not absolve the need to explain inputs.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains current_range_mode and voltage_range_mode but ignores device_path, current_range, and voltage_range, leaving their purpose and acceptable values undefined.

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 the tool configures JS220 current and voltage range modes, using the verb 'configure' and specifying the resource. It uniquely identifies its purpose among siblings, as no other sibling tool performs configuration.

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 advises 'Use auto for normal agent measurements,' providing context for a common use case, but lacks when-not to use or guidance for manual/off modes. No comparison to alternatives is given.

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