set_continuous

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains the key behavior (reapplied every frame) and mentions the return type (confirmation). It does not detail performance impact or side effects, but the core behavioral insight is adequately conveyed.

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 purpose. It uses structured sections (Args, Returns) without unnecessary words. Every sentence contributes essential information.

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 presence of an output schema, the description appropriately summarizes the return as 'Confirmation'. It covers the purpose, reason, parameters, and return. Missing details like performance warnings or multi-wheel interaction, but overall sufficient for a modification tool.

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 0%, so the description must provide meaning. It does so by explaining each parameter: range for wheel_index (0-3), examples for field ('camber', 'track_width'), clarifying value as the value to apply, and enabling as boolean toggle. This adds significant value beyond the schema's type-only definitions.

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 the tool sets a wheel value to be applied continuously every frame. It identifies the specific action ('set') and resource ('wheel value'), and the explanation about GTA V physics resetting distinguishes it from one-time setting tools like set_wheel_value.

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 explains the context (physics resets require continuous application) and implies when to use: for persistent visual modifications. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like set_wheel_value or clear_continuous, missing a clear when-not-to-use clause.

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