cls

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

Description discloses the core behavior (clearing status) and annotations confirm non-destructive. However, it does not mention side effects like clearing the error queue or event status register, which could impact subsequent queries.

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?

Single sentence with minimal waste. Front-loaded with purpose. Could be improved by separating the SCPI command for clarity, but still 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?

Lacks details on return values despite having an output schema. No mention of prerequisites or post-conditions. For a simple command it may suffice, but the missing parameter explanations hurt completeness.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions in schema) and the description provides no explanation of the 'alias' or 'params_json' parameters. The agent has no clue what these parameters do.

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 the verb 'clear' and resource 'instrument status', and includes the SCPI command (*CLS). It is clear and distinct from siblings like 'esr' which reads status. The 'GENERIC' tag suggests broad applicability.

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 generic version versus instrument-specific siblings like 'cmw_cls' or 'mxa_cls'. No usage context or alternatives provided.

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