add_signals_to_wave

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose whether this requires an active simulation, whether it modifies simulation state, how duplicate signals are handled, or what errors occur for invalid signal names.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted text. However, it is under-specified for the tool's context rather than optimally concise.

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 no annotations, no output schema, 0% parameter documentation, and many sibling simulation tools, the description is not complete enough. It omits required session state, signal-path format, and expected behavior when signals cannot be resolved.

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% for the single `signals` parameter. The description repeats that signals are added but does not explain the expected string format, such as hierarchical signal paths, wildcards, or scope qualification.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: adding signals to a waveform viewer. An agent can understand the basic action, but the description does not distinguish it from nearby simulation tools such as get_signal_value or get_simulation_objects.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, whether a simulation session must already be running, or what prerequisites apply. The waveform-viewer context is implied, but no explicit usage conditions or exclusions are given.

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