cmw_set_input_attenuation

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the existing annotations (destructiveHint: false). It lacks context on what 'input attenuation' means, whether it resets other settings, or any side effects. The description adds no value beyond the structured fields.

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 extremely short (one phrase), but this is not due to conciseness; it is due to under-specification. A score of 3 is borderline because while there is no wasted text, the description fails to convey necessary information.

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 that there are 2 generic parameters with no schema explanation, no output schema details, and no context on how this tool fits into the CMW workflow, the description is highly incomplete. The agent would struggle to understand what to provide for params_json.

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%, meaning the parameters 'alias' and 'params_json' are not explained in the schema. The description does not compensate at all; it provides no information about what these parameters represent or how they affect the attenuation setting.

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 '[CMW] 设置输入衰减' translates to 'Set input attenuation', which is a tautology of the tool name 'cmw_set_input_attenuation'. It does not provide any additional detail about what the tool does beyond the name.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among sibling tools like cmw_set_band, cmw_set_bandwidth, etc., there is no differentiation or context for usage.

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