set_dterm_lpf1_dyn_expo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the parameter's role (expo curve vs throttle) and tuning goal, but does not mention persistence, reboot requirements, side effects, or that the tool modifies persistent settings. This is a moderate disclosure.

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?

Two sentences plus a compact parenthetical with type/range/default. Every word is relevant and front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundancy.

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 (1 param, no output schema), the description covers purpose, tuning guidance, and parameter details. It doesn't mention the companion get tool or note that this is an advanced PID setting, but for a straightforward setter it is sufficiently complete.

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% (1 parameter fully described), so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by providing the default value (5) and the tuning strategy ('push as high as possible without oscillations'), which goes beyond the schema's range and type info.

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 action ('Set') and the resource ('dterm_lpf1_dyn_expo'), and explains it as an 'Expo curve for dynamic D-term LPF1 vs throttle.' This is specific and unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like set_dterm_lpf1_dyn_max_hz, though the unique name suffices.

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?

Provides explicit tuning guidance: 'Push as high as possible without mid-throttle oscillations.' This tells the agent the objective and constraint for choosing the value. It does not compare to alternatives (e.g., other D-term filter settings), but for a single-parameter setter this is adequate.

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