set_dterm_lpf2_static_hz

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 the filter is 'always static,' which is a behavioral trait, and gives the default value. However, it does not mention side effects (e.g., affects D-term filtering, flight behavior), permissions, or constraints beyond the schema's wide min/max.

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 plus a bracketed note with type and default. It front-loads the purpose and is free of unnecessary words. Every element serves a clear function.

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, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It explains what the parameter does and its role. However, adding context that this is a PID filter parameter affecting flight dynamics would improve completeness, but it is not critical.

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 already covers the parameter with 100% coverage, but the description adds value by explicitly stating the type as 'INT16' and providing the default value '150,' which is not present in the schema. This helps the agent understand expected range and typical value.

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 cutoff for D-term LPF2 and explains its purpose as a secondary anti-noise stage. It is distinct from siblings like set_dterm_lpf1_static_hz by naming the specific filter stage. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from set_dterm_lpf2_type or similar tools.

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 minimal guidance: 'Use as a secondary anti-noise stage.' This implies when to use (for noise reduction), but no explicit prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to alternatives like set_dterm_lpf2_type are given.

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