set_dyn_idle_p_gain

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 that it sets a gain and suggests a reduction for oscillation, but omits behavioral traits such as whether changes take effect immediately, require saving, or have side effects on other parameters.

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 bracket annotation. It front-loads the purpose and uses no unnecessary words, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 parameter setter with one input and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and a tuning hint. However, it lacks context about how it fits into the broader dynamic idle system (e.g., relationship to I and D gains) or operational notes (e.g., apply while disarmed).

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% (single integer parameter with min/max and description). The description repeats the same range and default in brackets, adding no new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 P gain of the dynamic idle RPM controller, which is a specific and distinct resource among many sibling set_* tools. The verb 'Set' is explicit and the resource is well-defined.

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 only guidance is 'Reduce if idle causes oscillation,' which is a vague tuning hint. There is no explicit statement about when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_dyn_idle_i_gain, or any context about prerequisites or conditions.

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