spice_run

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It clearly states the execution mode (batch), the return value (parsed .meas + log tail), and what it does not do (plot). This is transparent about its behavior, though it does not mention potential side effects like file writes or environment changes.

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 two concise sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the core action and includes the key caveat about plotting and the sibling tool, making it efficient and well-structured.

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?

The description gives a reasonable sense of the output (parsed .meas results and short log tail) and points to the alternative for engine probing. While it does not elaborate on the format of .meas results or the contents of the log tail, it is sufficient for an agent to gauge whether this tool is appropriate without being overly verbose.

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 schema already provides descriptions for all three parameters (cwd, netlist, timeout_ms), so the description adds little beyond reinforcing that netlist is a .cir/.sp path and timeout is in milliseconds. This is baseline coverage; the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding 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 runs a SPICE netlist in ngspice batch mode and returns parsed .meas results plus a log tail, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself by explicitly noting it does not plot, which helps disambiguate from other tools.

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?

The description explicitly mentions the alternative tool spice_toolchain_info for probing the engine, and states what this tool does not do (plot). This gives the agent a clear cue on when to use this tool versus the sibling, though it could be more explicit about scenario-based selection.

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