acquire_throttle

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses idempotency (safe to call again), that acquire reply reports speed/direction, automatic release on disconnect, and that it does not error or reset. Very thorough.

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?

Description is well-structured with clear sections, front-loaded key info, and uses bullet points for readability. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy.

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 two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage, behavior, parameters, lifecycle, and error handling. Completely self-contained.

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 0% (no descriptions in schema), but description fully explains both parameters: address as DCC address, prefix as optional command station prefix with examples. Adds meaning beyond the schema titles.

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?

Description clearly states the tool acquires control of a locomotive by DCC address and reports its state. Distinguishes from siblings like set_speed which auto-acquire, making the purpose precise.

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 (to know current speed/direction before deciding, or to target a non-default command station via prefix) and when not needed (for speed/stop/emergency_stop, which auto-acquire). Also mentions release behavior.

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