cli_save

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions saving to EEPROM, rebooting, and closing the connection. However, it does not disclose whether all pending changes are saved, what happens to unsaved changes, or that the operation overwrites EEPROM. The warning is helpful but not fully comprehensive.

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 two sentences: the first clearly states the action, the second is a critical warning. No wasted words, front-loaded with purpose.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and a straightforward action, the description is fairly complete. It could mention that it persists all pending `set` commands, but the warning about connection closure is valuable. For a simple tool, this is sufficient.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so no additional parameter information is needed. Schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add param meaning, and baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 the tool saves configuration to EEPROM and reboots the flight controller. It distinguishes from siblings like `reboot_flight_controller` (which only reboots) and `cli_defaults` (which resets to defaults). The verb 'save' and resource 'configuration to EEPROM' are specific.

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 usage after configuration changes but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives like `reboot_flight_controller`. The warning about connection closure gives indirect guidance, but no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' is provided.

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