feature_enable

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Enable' implying mutation, but lacks details on persistence, side effects, or post-enable actions needed (e.g., reboot). Minimal transparency for a state-changing tool.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no extraneous words. It directly conveys the action and includes helpful examples without fluff.

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 domain (many feature names) and lack of output schema or annotation, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention how to discover valid feature names (e.g., via feature_list) or any other contextual information needed for correct usage.

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 100%—the 'name' parameter already has a description. The tool description adds examples (TELEMETRY, GPS, SOFTSERIAL), which aids understanding but does not explain format or valid values beyond that. Adds moderate value.

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 'Enable a named feature on the flight controller' with specific examples (TELEMETRY, GPS, SOFTSERIAL). It is distinct from sibling tools like feature_disable and feature_list.

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 provides no guidance on when to enable vs disable a feature, no prerequisites, and no mention of checking current features or using feature_list. This leaves the agent without context for appropriate usage.

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