detect_rc_channel_move

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds the real behavioral context: it polls over a window rather than sampling once, and returns the peak-delta channel. It does not spell out the exact return shape, but for a read-only polling tool the disclosure is solid.

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?

Front-loads the core behavior, then the protocol, then the rationale, with no filler. Each sentence carries distinct information.

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?

Covers the full workflow including the prerequisite get_rc call and the per-axis repetition, which is exactly what an agent must know before invoking it. Absence of an output schema is compensated by the description naming what is returned.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline, threshold, and duration_s are already documented. The description still adds provenance for baseline (must come from get_rc's channels field) and frames duration_s as an observation window, going slightly 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?

States a specific verb and resource (polls RC channels, returns the channel with the largest baseline delta over a window) and explicitly contrasts itself with the instantaneous alternative. An agent can distinguish this from get_rc and snapshot_rc_delta without opening any schema.

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?

Gives the full when-and-how: a numbered protocol (get_rc baseline, ask user to move ONE control, call this tool, repeat per axis) plus the reliability rationale. Usage is unambiguous and nothing is left to inference.

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