set_d_yaw

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the effect (adding noise) and notes the default value and data type. For a simple parameter setting tool, this is sufficient transparency.

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 at two sentences plus a data type annotation. Every word serves a purpose: naming the parameter, explaining its behavior, and providing usage guidance. No 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 tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description provides all necessary information: what it does, the parameter's meaning, default value, and behavioral caution. No missing elements.

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 type and constraints (100% coverage). The description adds valuable context: the typical default (0), the rationale for leaving it at 0, and the data type hint. This goes beyond mere schema repetition.

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 yaw D gain, a specific PID parameter. The name 'set_d_yaw' directly indicates the action and resource, and the description elaborates with context about yaw being torque-based and slower, distinguishing it from other D gain setters like set_d_pitch.

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 advises that d_yaw is 'usually left at 0' and explains why ('yaw is torque-based and inherently slower; D adds noise'), providing clear guidance on when adjustment is inadvisable. It does not explicitly list alternatives but the sibling tools include analogous setters for other axes, making the usage context clear.

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