pikvm_clear_calibration

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

With no annotations provided, the description must itself disclose behavioral traits. It states that the tool reverts to uncalibrated mode, indicating it is a mutation operation. However, it does not mention any potential side effects or prerequisites. The description is adequate for a simple parameterless tool but lacks detail about persistence or permissions.

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 a single sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and outcome concisely, earning its place.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema and a straightforward action, the description is complete. It conveys the essential information for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information. The baseline score for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds value by clarifying the tool's purpose.

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 'Clear mouse calibration, reverting to uncalibrated mode' uses a specific verb ('Clear') and resource ('mouse calibration'), making the action immediately understandable. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like pikvm_set_calibration or pikvm_get_calibration.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pikvm_auto_calibrate or pikvm_calibrate. Given the number of calibration-related siblings, explicit usage context would be helpful.

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