homing

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the crash-and-stop behavior, the zeroing action, that broadcasts get no responses, and the risk of fatal errors if maxDuration is too short. This is transparent about key behaviors an agent needs to know.

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 well-structured: a clear definition, a safety note, a parameter list, a return note, and motor addressing details. It is front-loaded with the core concept and each section serves a purpose, though it could be slightly more succinct without losing clarity.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description covers the operation, parameter semantics, safety precautions, return type, and motor addressing. It is sufficient for an agent to call the tool correctly, with only minor omissions such as detailed error response formats or behavior when no crash occurs within maxDistance.

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 input schema has zero descriptions for its parameters, so the description must fully compensate. It explains maxDistance in degrees with sign determining direction, maxDuration in seconds with a caution about timing, and motor covering aliases, unique IDs, or 'all' with the broadcast behavior. This adds substantial semantic meaning beyond the bare 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 states that homing means moving until a crash and then stopping immediately, and that it zeroes the position there. This clearly identifies the operation. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like move_to or move_relative, though the name and definition are distinctive enough.

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 provides practical usage guidance: it warns to ensure a hard stop exists within maxDistance and to give enough time via maxDuration to avoid fatal errors. This implies when homing is appropriate (establishing a reference position), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it.

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