Prepare Param

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

Annotations declare this is a non-readonly, non-idempotent, non-destructive write, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it doesn't say what file/state is mutated, whether repeated inserts create duplicates (idempotentHint=false suggests they do), or what happens on failure.

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 short sentence with no waste and the action front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise for a 4-parameter mutation 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?

With no output schema, no usage guidance, and 75% of parameters undocumented, the definition leaves the agent without enough information to invoke this correctly in a schematic-editing workflow.

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 only 25% (just the optional `workspace_root`), and the description supplies no meaning for `name`, `value`, or `schematic_path` — e.g. whether `value` is a numeric literal, expression, or parameter reference. It fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 concrete verb ('Insert') and resource (a SPICE `.param` directive), which is more specific than the bare name 'prepare_param'. It does not, however, distinguish this tool from close siblings such as `set_parameter`, `set_component_parameters`, or `run_param_sweep`, leaving the agent to guess which one writes a top-level .param directive.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus `set_parameter` (component parameter) or `run_param_sweep` (sweeping a parameter). No prerequisites, no mention of ordering or whether a schematic must already be open.

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