getPlotNames

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 states that the tool lists plot names, which implies a read-only operation, but does not disclose any potential side effects, permissions needed, or limitations. It is minimally 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 a single, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose without extraneous words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 has two optional parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description is brief but adequate for a simple listing operation. However, it lacks explanation of how run_id and raw_path relate, and does not specify what plot names are or how they are returned, leaving some gaps for an agent unfamiliar with LTspice.

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, meaning the description must explain the parameters. The description mentions 'RAW file' and 'run' but does not explicitly map to the parameters run_id and raw_path. The agent cannot infer the parameter meanings without additional context.

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 action (list), the resource (LTspice plot names), and the scope (in one RAW file or all RAW files from a run). It distinguishes from sibling tools like getVectorsInfo which list vector names, not plot names.

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 implies when to use the tool (to list plot names from RAW files), but does not explicitly provide when-not-to-use or mention alternative tools. It is adequate for basic guidance but lacks depth for complex decisions.

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