set_blackbox_disable_motors

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Exclude motor output data,' which reveals the effect on blackbox logs but does not disclose whether the change is immediate, persistent, or requires a reboot. It also does not mention any side effects or prerequisites, leaving significant behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 very concise, fitting the essential information into a single sentence. However, it lacks structured formatting (e.g., bullet points) and could separate the parameter details for clarity, but overall it is efficient and front-loaded with the action.

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 simple setter with a single enum parameter, the description adequately explains the purpose (exclude motor data) and parameter format. The sibling tools provide context via naming convention. No output schema exists, so return value explanation is unnecessary. The description is sufficient for this straightforward tool.

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 parameter schema is fully covered (100%) with enum of 'OFF' and 'ON' and a description. The description adds 'UINT32, default: OFF', which provides the default value and type hint beyond the schema. This is useful but not extensive; the schema already defines the valid values.

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 'Set blackbox_disable_motors: Exclude motor output data.' This identifies the tool as a setter for the blackbox_disable_motors parameter and explains its effect. It is distinct from the getter sibling get_blackbox_disable_motors, but does not explicitly differentiate from other set_blackbox_disable_* tools, though the name implies the affected subsystem.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, there is no mention of using get_blackbox_disable_motors to read the current value or comparing with other blackbox logging settings. The description lacks any context for usage decisions.

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