mxa_cls

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond that. It does not explain side effects, reversibility, or the nature of the status clearance (e.g., which registers).

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 concise at one line, but for a simple command this might be acceptable. However, it sacrifices useful details for brevity.

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?

Although the tool is simple and has an output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns or any broader context. It only states the basic action.

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%, and the description does not explain the 'alias' or 'params_json' parameters. The agent receives no guidance on how to use these standard generic parameters for this specific tool.

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 'Clear instrument status (*CLS)' clearly states the verb (clear) and resource (instrument status). The MXA prefix differentiates it from sibling 'cls' tool for a different instrument, though the description does not explicitly do this.

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 like 'cls' or other status-related tools. The description lacks any context for usage decisions.

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