set_baro_spi_device

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the action and constraints (range, default). It does not disclose side effects, persistence, validation, or whether changes take effect immediately or require a reboot.

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 line with no filler. Every piece (action, resource, prerequisite, type, range, default) is essential and front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete: it explains the purpose, value constraints, and a prerequisite. It lacks behavioral details but suffices for a basic parameter setter.

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 schema covers the single parameter with 100% coverage (type, min, max, description). The description adds context (SPI bus number for barometer) and default value, but these add only marginal value over the schema.

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 sets the SPI bus number for the barometer, using a specific verb (Set) and resource (baro_spi_device). It is distinct from sibling barometer-related set tools like set_baro_i2c_device.

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 mentions a prerequisite (Requires: USE_BARO), which helps decide when to use it, but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives or what context is appropriate.

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