set_blackbox_disable_rc

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states that the tool excludes RC channel data from logs, but does not mention persistence, reboot requirements, or side effects like reduced debugging capability. The default value is noted, but the behavioral impact beyond the basic effect is absent.

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 extremely concise: one sentence and a brief note. It contains no fluff, and every phrase ('Set', 'Exclude RC channel data from logs') adds value. It is well front-loaded and appropriate for a simple setter.

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 simplicity of the tool (single parameter, straightforward setting), the description is adequate but minimal. It does not explain that this is part of a family of blackbox disable settings, nor does it clarify the effect on logging when set to OFF vs ON. With no output schema, the description could be more complete by stating that the change is persistent.

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 coverage for the single parameter is 100%, so the schema already documents the parameter type, enum values, and a basic description. The description adds context ('Exclude RC channel data from logs') that clarifies the intent of the values, but does not provide new semantic detail beyond the schema. Score is baseline 3 as per guidelines.

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's purpose: 'Set blackbox_disable_rc: Exclude RC channel data from logs.' It uses a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('blackbox_disable_rc'), and the purpose is well-differentiated from siblings like 'set_blackbox_disable_acc' and 'set_blackbox_disable_gyro'.

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. The description does not mention prerequisites, consequences of disabling RC logging, or when it is appropriate to use. With many similar set_blackbox_disable_* siblings, explicit usage context would be beneficial.

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