system_reset

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure. It details the immediate reset, bootloader timeout, reboot duration (~2s), position re-zeroing, MOSFET disabling, fatal error clearing, and broadcast no-response behavior. This is thorough and leaves no ambiguity about side effects.

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 organized with a main action, a note for key effects, a return value, and a parameter explanation. It is reasonably concise and front-loaded, though the note section could be slightly more compact without losing 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, behavior, side effects, return value, and parameter semantics. There is nothing an agent needs to know to call this tool correctly that is missing.

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 provides zero description coverage for the 'motor' parameter, but the description compensates fully by explaining the accepted formats: alias number, 16-hex-digit ID, or 'all' for broadcast, including the note that broadcasts yield no responses. This is exactly the semantic information an agent needs.

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 explicitly states the action: 'System reset / go to the bootloader' and explains the immediate reset behavior. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'reset_time' and 'emergency_stop' by focusing on the bootloader entry and reboot side effects.

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 implies usage (for rebooting/resetting a motor) but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like 'emergency_stop' or 'reset_time'. There is no direct guidance on when not to use it or which tool to use instead for other scenarios.

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