scope_set_memory_size

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses model-dependent availability, transport (SCPI), and the effect on transfer speed. However, it does not mention any destructive behavior, authentication, or rate limits, which are not critical for a setter tool but could be noted.

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 brief (4 sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, parameter list, trade-off, transport. The 'Args:' section is slightly redundant with schema but still helpful.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, setter action), the description covers purpose, parameter details, behavior (model-dependent, speed trade-off), and transport. Output schema exists (not shown) so return values are handled.

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 has 0% description coverage and no enums. The description compensates by listing exact size values ('500, 1K, 10K...'), explaining meaning ('Larger = more detail, slower transfer'), and adding model constraints. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 states 'Set the acquisition memory depth (record length),' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like scope_set_tdiv (timebase) and scope_configure_channel (channel settings) by focusing on memory depth.

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 provides usage context: 'Larger = more detail, slower transfer' and notes model-dependent maximum sizes (e.g., WaveSurfer 3000Z max 10M). It does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, but the trade-off is clear.

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