Enable, disable, reset faults, quick-stop, and command velocity or position moves on CiA 402 servo drives over EtherCAT for precise motion control.
High-level CiA 402 Servo Drive Motion Control (enable, disable, quick_stop, fault_reset, move_velocity, move_position).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| action | Yes | Drive control action | |
| target | No | Target position (inc) or target velocity (inc/s) | |
| slaveIndex | No | Slave index of the CiA 402 drive (default 4) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral-disclosure burden. It names the actions but does not explain their effects, safety implications, prerequisites, whether they mutate drive state, or what happens on enable/disable/quick_stop/fault_reset.
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 front-loaded sentence with no waste. The parenthetical action list is compact and directly supports the tool's purpose.
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?
With no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain safety, state changes, and action-specific parameter behavior. It does not address whether target is required for motion actions, how fault_reset interacts with reset_error, or what a caller should expect after each action.
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 description coverage is 100%, including descriptions for action, target, and slaveIndex, so the baseline is 3. The description only repeats the action enum and adds no additional meaning about target units, action-specific target requirements, or the slaveIndex default.
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 states that this is a CiA 402 servo drive motion-control tool and enumerates its six actions. The verb+resource are clear, but it does not distinguish itself from siblings such as reset_error, write_sdo, or set_esm_state.
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 lists available actions but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. In particular, it does not clarify how fault_reset differs from the sibling reset_error or when to prefer drive_control over ESM/SDO operations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.