Begins logging data received on a specified serial port to a local file using an absolute file path.
Start saving the data received on a port to a local file. The path must be absolute.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| port | Yes | ||
| filepath | Yes | Absolute file path, for example C:/log.txt |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the file-write side effect and the absolute-path constraint, but not whether an existing file is overwritten or appended, permission requirements, error behavior, or what the call returns.
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?
Two sentences, zero waste, and the core action is front-loaded before the path constraint.
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?
For a state-changing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin: it omits prerequisites, file-open semantics, failure modes, and any return/confirmation behavior.
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 coverage is 50%. The filepath parameter is documented in the schema as an absolute path, and the description merely repeats that constraint. The port parameter has no explanation of expected format or how it relates to list_serial_ports/connect_serial, so the description does not compensate for the coverage 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?
States a specific verb and side effect: 'start saving the data received on a port to a local file.' The start/stop pairing with sibling stop_saving_file makes the action distinguishable, though it never explicitly contrasts the two.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus reading data with read_received_data or enabling auto-send. It also omits prerequisites such as whether the port must already be connected and receiving data.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.