set_crashflip_motor_percent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that 0 disables motors and >0 enables, recommends 100. It also specifies data type and range. However, it does not mention side effects, persistence, or conditions for effectiveness (e.g., active crash flip mode).

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: two sentences plus range info. It front-loads the purpose and provides all essential information without wasted words.

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 one-parameter setter without output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, default behavior, and recommended value. It does not mention instant effects or restart requirements, but these are minor for such a 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with a basic description. The tool description adds significant value by explaining the effect of different values (0 vs >0) and recommending 100, which goes beyond the schema's minimal description.

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 motor output percentage during crash flip/turtle mode. It explains the effect of 0 (disabled) and >0 (enabled, recommending 100). This distinguishes it from sibling set_ tools, each for different parameters.

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 clear context: when to use (to enable/disable flip thrust). It recommends 100 for enabling. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but since each set_ tool targets a unique parameter, no direct alternative exists.

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