flipper_gpio_set_mode

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (modifies state) and destructiveHint=false (not destructive). The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond 'configure', such as whether changes take effect immediately, affect other GPIO operations, or require specific permissions. With minimal annotation coverage, the description should disclose more.

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 clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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 the tool has three parameters, no output schema, and involves hardware configuration, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the effect of setting a mode, the return value (likely success/error), or how this tool relates to other GPIO tools (e.g., flipper_gpio_read, flipper_gpio_write). Essential context 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?

Schema description coverage is only 33% (only 'port' has a description). The description provides no meaning for 'pin' or 'mode' beyond the enum values listed in the schema. It does not explain what each pin corresponds to physically or the implications of INPUT vs OUTPUT. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 'Configure a GPIO pin as INPUT or OUTPUT' provides a specific verb ('configure') and resource ('GPIO pin'), and clearly states the two mode values. It distinguishes from siblings like flipper_gpio_read and flipper_gpio_write, which handle reading and writing pin states, respectively.

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 (e.g., flipper_gpio_read, flipper_gpio_write). It does not state prerequisites, such as requiring the GPIO to be set to OUTPUT before writing, or the effect on ongoing operations. Usage context is only implicit.

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