scope_cursor_info

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It only mentions 'Transport: SCPI' but does not disclose read-only nature, potential side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. The phrase 'Query' implies safety but not explicitly.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every word serves a function; no fluff.

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 zero parameters and presence of an output schema (not shown), the minimal description suffices. However, a note about typical cursor modes or return structure could enrich completeness.

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?

Tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. Per guideline, 0 parameters warrants a baseline of 4. Description adds no parameter info but none is needed.

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 'Query current cursor measurements from the oscilloscope', specifying the verb (Query), resource (cursor measurements), and context (oscilloscope). It distinctly differentiates from sibling tools like scope_set_cursor_type or scope_measure.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., scope_measure, scope_measure_all). No preconditions or exclusions are mentioned, such as requiring a cursor type to be set first.

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