mxa_set_freq_start_stop

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits beyond what the annotations already indicate (destructiveHint=false). There is no mention of side effects, prerequisites, or state modifications. For a setter tool, the agent needs more context about potential impacts on instrument state.

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 very short (one sentence) and front-loaded with purpose, but it omits crucial parameter information. It sacrifices completeness for brevity, making it insufficiently informative.

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's complexity (2 undocumented parameters, no behavioral hints), the description is far from complete. It fails to explain what the parameters do or how to use the tool effectively, leaving the agent with significant ambiguity.

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 description does not explain the two parameters 'alias' and 'params_json' at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but fails to add any meaning beyond the schema's default values. The agent cannot infer the purpose or format of these parameters.

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 and resource: '设置起始和终止频率' (Set start and stop frequency). It uses a specific verb and resource combination, and distinguishes from sibling tools like mxa_set_frequency which likely sets a single frequency.

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 such as mxa_set_frequency or other frequency configuration tools. There are no explicit context, exclusions, or when-not-to-use instructions.

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