bandmode

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses behavioral traits such as the dependency on rig interface state, the effect of ignore_rig_polls (pausing polling), and the side effect of CW/phone segment flipping. The caution to reset ignore_rig_polls to false shows awareness of state management.

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 one-line purpose followed by a clear bullet list of operations. Each sentence adds value without redundancy. The front-loaded purpose and logical grouping make it easy to scan. It is concise yet comprehensive.

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 complexity (multiple operations with conditional behaviors) and lack of output schema or rich annotations, the description is complete. It covers all operations, parameter formats, prerequisites, and a safety note. An agent can confidently invoke any operation based solely on this description.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's role per operation. It specifies acceptable values for 'value' (e.g., Hz, band like '20', mode like 'DIG') and the meaning of 'suppress_mode_default'. This adds critical semantic context beyond the raw 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 the tool's purpose: 'Change band, mode, and frequency before logging.' It differentiates from sibling tools like 'log' and 'status' by focusing on rig configuration. The verb 'Change' and the specific resources (band, mode, frequency) provide unambiguous purpose.

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 detailed usage guidelines for each operation, including conditions (e.g., 'rig interface OFF only' for set_band, 'use suppress_mode_default=true to keep current mode'). It also includes a general caution to ensure correct band/mode before logging. This gives clear when-to-use and how-to-use instructions.

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