capture_waveform

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing several behaviors: returned data is in volts, data may be written to a CSV file with path in data_file, screen data may be decimated, and effective sample rate is the reciprocal of sample_interval_s. These are genuinely useful operational details.

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 compact and front-loads the core behavior, with additional caveats placed after. It contains no filler, though the phrasing about decimation could be more directly connected to the input 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?

The description is reasonably complete for a capture operation: it covers unit conversion, CSV fallback, decimation, and sample rate. However, with no output schema and no parameter explanations, it leaves gaps around expected return shape and the meaning of channel and max_points.

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 what channel or max_points mean or how they affect the capture. The mention of 'many points' vaguely relates to output handling, but it never ties that to max_points.

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 states a clear verb and resource: capturing waveform data and converting it to volts. This distinguishes it from a screenshot capture or decode, but it does not explicitly differentiate from closely related measurement tools like measure or analyze_waveform.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_channel, measure, or analyze_waveform. It explains behavior but not the selection context or prerequisites.

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