set_dyn_notch_min_hz

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that tracking low frequencies causes unwanted filtering of PID-relevant signals, a key behavioral consequence. It doesn't mention persistence or required reboot, but for a simple parameter setter 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 concise (4 sentences), front-loaded with the title and purpose, and ends with inline schema info. Every sentence contributes meaning without 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?

The description covers purpose, usage, parameter semantics, and behavioral trade-offs. It doesn't mention effect timing (e.g., immediate, after save/reboot), but for a simple setter this is acceptable. Given no output schema and complete siblings, it is nearly 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%, baseline 3. The description adds significant value: it states the default (100), the range [20–250], the type (UINT16), and provides contextual guidance on recommended value calculation and the trade-off of low values.

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 minimum frequency for dynamic notch tracking. It uses the verb 'Set' on the resource 'dyn_notch_min_hz' and explains its role as the lower bound for notch frequency. This distinguishes it from siblings like set_dyn_notch_max_hz.

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 explicit guidance: set ~25 Hz below the lowest resonance, ideally >=150 Hz unless blackbox shows real resonance below that. It warns against tracking low frequencies to avoid unwanted filtering, giving clear when-to-use and what-to-avoid advice.

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