mxa_select_sa

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

The description only indicates the mode selection, with no disclosure of behavioral traits such as state changes, side effects, or required instrument state. Annotations provide only destructiveHint=false, leaving the agent without insight into side effects or safety considerations.

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 short sentence, which is concise, but it lacks necessary details about parameters and usage. Conciseness is valued, but not at the cost of informativeness; the sentence is too sparse for a tool with unannotated parameters.

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 simplicity of the tool (mode selection with optional parameters) and the presence of output schema, the description could be adequate, but it fails to mention any prerequisite steps or post-selection effects. With zero parameter guidance, it feels incomplete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it provides no explanation of the 'alias' and 'params_json' parameters. The agent has no guidance on what values to pass or how they affect behavior, relying solely on defaults.

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 that the tool selects the Spectrum Analyzer mode, providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate this tool from numerous other spectrum analyzer tools (e.g., mxa_config_harmonics, mxa_fetch_harmonics) that also operate in SA mode, leaving the agent unsure of the unique purpose.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., connecting to instrument) or exclusions (e.g., when to use other mode selection tools). The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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