move_to_pose

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety bar is partly covered. The description adds real context beyond them: motion is slow, the pose is locally taught and verified safe, and it warns against use under obstruction. What's missing is reversibility/halt behavior and permission needs.

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?

Two tight sentences, the core action front-loaded and the safety caveat directly after. Every clause earns its place.

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 tool with destructive annotations, the safety warning is present, but the description leaves the agent without a pointer to discover valid pose names (list_safe_poses is the obvious sibling), which is a meaningful gap for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load. 'By name' signals the name refers to a taught pose, which adds meaning over the bare 'name' string, but it never says where valid names come from (e.g., list_safe_poses) or the accepted format.

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?

States a specific verb (move) and resource (a taught safe pose identified by name), plus a speed/scope qualifier (slowly). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the other motion siblings (move_joints, move_joint_by), but the 'safe pose by name' framing gives a clear functional identity.

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?

Provides one exclusion ('Do not use if work area is obstructed'), which is useful guidance. However, it offers no positive when-to-use condition and no routing versus move_joints or move_joint_by, so the agent must infer which motion tool to pick.

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