waver_find

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful behavioral detail: case-insensitive string matching, all-X/all-Z bus matching, and interval/duration output from start onwards. It does not disclose that `limit` can cap the returned intervals, so it is not fully transparent.

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 concrete question examples, then adds necessary type-matching rules and routing guidance. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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?

With an output schema present, return values do not need to be spelled out, and readOnly annotation covers safety. The main missing context is `limit` semantics and a bit more clarity around `file`, but an agent can still reasonably determine how to invoke the tool.

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 compensate. It thoroughly explains `value` and partially `start` and `signal`, but `file` is not described and `limit` is never mentioned despite defaulting to 100 and affecting how many intervals are returned. This is a meaningful gap.

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 operation: find intervals where a signal equals a given value, and immediately gives concrete question forms. It also distinguishes the tool from waver_value_at, making its purpose easy to separate from siblings.

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 explicitly names alternatives: waver_value_at for a single time point and waver_analyze for statistics. It also gives practical matching rules for ints, strings/enums, and logic vectors, so an agent knows when and how the tool applies.

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