reset

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

Discloses key behavioral traits: it is a system reset that reboots (~2s), recovers from latched faults, and leaves the motor in a clean idle state. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does so effectively.

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?

Highly concise: three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. Each sentence adds unique value—purpose, when to use, outcome, and parameter guidance. No wasted words.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is complete: it explains when to use, what happens, how to use the parameter, and a rough timing estimate. No gaps remain.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning. It explains that omitting motor resets all motors, which is the primary semantic. However, it does not specify the expected format of the motor parameter (e.g., name or identifier), which could be inferred from context but is not explicit.

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 specifies the tool's action (recover a motor from a latched fault via firmware reset), the resource (motor), and the context (latched fault). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_status, which only reports status, and other motion 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?

Explicitly states when to use: when get_status reports an error that won't clear on its own. It also implies when not to use (if the error can be cleared otherwise) and describes the outcome (motor returns to clean idle state). Provides a usage note about omitting motor to reset all.

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