generate_current_mirror

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the output is .CIR text, that the current mirror has an Early effect causing a few % deviation, and how to read the output node. This goes beyond a basic restatement.

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 well-structured with a clear opening, a brief circuit explanation, and a bullet-like Args list. Every sentence adds value, including the formula for computing Iref and the note about Early effect, without being verbose.

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 has no annotations, no schema descriptions, but an output schema (returns .CIR text), the description covers the key aspects: what it does, how to use it, what the parameters mean, and what output to expect. It ties into the simulation workflow by suggesting transient/DC analysis.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters, and it does. Each of the five parameters is listed with its role (e.g., rref sets Iref) and analysis type is specified as transient or dc, providing meaning 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 clearly states it draws a .CIR BJT current mirror, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying it's a current mirror generator, not an amplifier or other circuit.

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?

It provides usage context by explaining the circuit is a DC bias block and should be run with transient/DC analysis, not AC. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, but this context helps an agent decide when to use it.

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