Set the RX frequency

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the LO becomes the center of the captured band, and there is an AD9361-specific quirk about DC offset and LO leakage. This helps an agent anticipate the operational effect of the tuning action. It does not contradict the idempotent or non-destructive hints.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action and units, followed by the valid range and a useful caveat. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant filler or repetition of the title.

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?

For a simple setter with one required parameter, an output schema, and clear annotations, the description is complete: it states the action, range, and an important operational caveat. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameter meaning is already documented. The description adds value by clarifying what frequency_hz actually controls—the local oscillator, which becomes the center of the captured band—rather than just restating the schema. This extra semantic context helps the agent select an appropriate value.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Set the receive local oscillator, in Hz,' and gives the valid range. It clearly identifies this as the tuning operation and distinguishes it from related tools by explaining the LO becomes the center of the captured band.

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 clear context about when this tool is relevant and includes practical advice to tune deliberately off-signal to avoid LO leakage and DC offset. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when a different tool such as sdr_configure_rx should be used instead.

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