set_esc_sensor_current_offset

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes the effect (setting offset in mA), the valid range (0–16000), and default value (0). It does not mention persistence or side effects, but for a parameter setting tool, this is adequate and consistent with sibling set_* tools.

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, at two sentences plus a requirement and range notation. It front-loads the action and packs essential information (what, why, prerequisite, range, default) 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?

Given that this is a simple single-parameter setter with no output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose, parameter semantics, and a prerequisite. It does not address immediate effects or return value, but that is typical for such tools and the description is complete enough for an agent to use it correctly.

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%, and the schema documents the parameter type and range. The description adds value by explaining the parameter's purpose ('current offset applied to ESC sensor current reading'), its unit (mA), and its usage for zero-calibration, going beyond the schema's minimal 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?

Description clearly states the verb 'set' and the resource 'esc_sensor_current_offset'. It explains the tool's function: applying a current offset for zero-calibrating ESC current reporting. This distinguishes it from get_esc_sensor_current_offset and other set_* tools by specifying the exact resource and purpose.

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 a clear usage context: 'Use to zero-calibrate ESC current reporting.' It also specifies a prerequisite (requires USE_ESC_SENSOR). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools, but the given guidance is sufficient for this simple setter.

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