zero_motor_position

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

The description discloses the two primary behavioral effects: halting the motor and resetting the encoder reference. This adds meaningful context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true) and does not contradict them.

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, compact sentence with no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 single-parameter, no-output-schema tool with annotations indicating idempotency and non-destructiveness, the description is adequately complete. The main gaps are the lack of usage differentiation and any statement about return behavior, but these are minor given the tool's simplicity.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate for parameter documentation, but it never mentions the 'port' parameter. The schema's enum is the only source of meaning for the parameter, and the description adds nothing to it.

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 uses specific verbs and resources: 'Stop a motor' and 'reset its absolute encoder reference to zero.' This clearly conveys the operation and distinguishes it from siblings like stop_motor and zero_sensor_reference.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as stop_motor or zero_sensor_reference. There are no stated conditions, exclusions, or mention of prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the operation name.

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