set_dterm_notch_hz

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

With no annotations, the description adds transparency by stating the default value (0), that 0 disables the notch, and the data type (UINT16). It does not mention side effects or persistence, but for a simple static setting this is adequate.

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 very concise: three sentences packed with essential information. No redundant words, every sentence adds value.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description is complete: it covers purpose, parameter semantics, default, and usage context relative to dynamic notch.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining the meaning of 0 ('0 = disabled') and specifying the default value ('default: 0'), which goes beyond the schema's parameter 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's purpose: 'Set dterm_notch_hz: Static D-term notch centre frequency.' It differentiates from siblings by noting it is a static notch and contrasting with dynamic notch ('Rarely needed when dynamic notch is active').

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'Rarely needed when dynamic notch is active.' This implies using dynamic notch when active, but does not explicitly list all alternative tools or scenarios.

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