set_gripper_width

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It usefully explains that the profile validates exact joint names and types before applying any position target, which is valuable behavioral context. However, it does not mention failure modes, side effects, or what happens when validation fails.

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 compact and well-structured: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds necessary detail about validation and width semantics. No filler or repetition.

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?

The description covers the main intent and key parameter semantics, and an output schema exists, so return values do not need explaining. However, it lacks guidance on selecting this tool over gripper siblings and leaves prim_path's role implicit, which are meaningful gaps for an agent.

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 compensate. It does clarify that width_m is the total distance between both fingers and that profile enables joint validation, but it leaves prim_path and command_id semantically unexplained.

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 action and resource: 'Set total gripper opening width'. This is clear and distinct from sibling tools like open_gripper/close_gripper in intent, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives or explain the difference.

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 implies this tool is for explicit width-based gripper control via a robot profile, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus open_gripper/close_gripper or set_joint_positions. There is no when-not-to-use guidance.

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