mxa_set_harm_bw

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

The description only says 'set harmonic measurement bandwidth' with no behavioral context. Annotations only provide destructiveHint=false. There is no disclosure of side effects, necessary conditions, or interaction with other settings. For a simple setter, this is insufficient.

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), which is concise but lacks necessary structure. It does not use front-loaded key information or separate sections. Brevity here sacrifices clarity and completeness.

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 has two parameters (both with defaults) and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the purpose or valid values of the parameters. The presence of an output schema alleviates the need to describe return values, but parameter documentation is missing.

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 any parameters. The two parameters (alias and params_json) are opaque. The description should clarify what params_json expects, but it fails to add any meaning beyond the schema.

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 tool sets harmonic measurement bandwidth, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not distinguish this from similar sibling tools like mxa_set_harm_average or other mxa_set_* commands, so it loses a point for lack of differentiation.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it suggest prerequisites or context. This is a significant gap.

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