transmit

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

The description discloses that keying operations require a configured callsign and that rx/abort/disable_tx are always allowed (taking station off air). It also notes that 'send' auto-returns to receive. However, it omits error scenarios, rate limits, or other side effects.

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 concise, using two sentences. It front-loads the purpose ('Transmitter control') and then lists operations and key constraints. The list format is somewhat messy but overall efficient.

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 complexity (multiple operations, 4 parameters, no output schema or annotations), the description lacks detail on what each operation does exactly, error conditions, return values, and the type of 'value' parameter. It leaves many gaps for the agent.

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?

The description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema by listing operation values (tx, tune, etc.), explaining that for run_macro the parameter 'value' is an id, and for 'send' the parameter 'text' is used. It also clarifies the default behavior of 'return_to_rx'. Schema coverage was 0%, so this is valuable.

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 'Transmitter control' and lists specific operations (tx, tune, rx, etc.), clearly indicating what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing exclusively on transmitter operations.

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 minimal guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions that keying operations require a configured callsign, but does not compare with sibling tools like 'controls' or 'modem' to help the agent choose.

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