scope_configure_trigger

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: partial application of parameters, default channel for level, and transport protocol (SCPI). This gives the agent complete transparency into the tool's behavior.

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 concise and well-structured: one-sentence summary, then bullet points for each parameter with allowed values, plus a transport note. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the four optional parameters, the description covers all necessary usage context: default behaviors, the alternative sibling for complex triggers, and parameter interactions. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be detailed.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds full meaning to each parameter: modes are listed, source channels enumerated, slope edges given, and level unit specified. This compensates entirely for the lack of schema enum or description.

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 trigger mode, source, slope, and level in a single call, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It also distinguishes from sibling scope_write for complex triggers, avoiding ambiguity.

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 explicitly states all parameters are optional and applied only if provided. It directs users to scope_write for complex trigger types and gives a clear rule about level defaulting to C1 when source is omitted, providing excellent guidance on when and how to use the tool.

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