set_gravity

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation/non-destructive profile is covered. The description adds a useful behavioral detail by specifying that the gravity applies to self-weight, but it does not disclose side effects, persistence, or scope beyond that.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The Args block is useful, though the Chinese translation is slightly redundant for an AI agent consuming the description.

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 one-optional-parameter simple setter tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it names the effect (self-weight gravity), units, and default. Missing usage guidance is a minor gap but not crippling for such a simple operation.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description's Args block compensates well: it defines gravity as gravitational acceleration in m/s² and notes the default 9.8. This adds semantics beyond the bare schema type and 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Set the gravitational acceleration used for self-weight.' This clearly conveys what the tool does and is specific enough to distinguish it from most sibling tools, though it does not explicitly compare itself to related tools like set_self_weight_stage.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. With many sibling tools in the same domain, the agent receives no routing information beyond the basic purpose statement.

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