set_ez_landing_speed

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It tells that the tool sets a rate, specifies the data type (UINT8), range (0-250), and default value (50 per profile). However, it does not disclose whether changes take effect immediately, require saving to a profile, or trigger any side effects. The information is adequate for a simple parameter setter but lacks depth.

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: one sentence with a parenthetical technical note. It front-loads the purpose and includes key details. The structure is efficient, though the tool name is repeated in the description, which is slightly redundant but acceptable. Every part contributes to clarity.

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 setter with one parameter and no output schema, the description conveys the core purpose, range, default, and that the setting is per profile. It lacks information about persistence or activation, but given the low complexity, it is reasonably complete. The per-profile note adds useful context not evident from the schema alone.

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 input schema already describes the 'value' parameter with its type and range (100% coverage). The tool description adds meaning by explaining the parameter's role ('rate at which throttle is reduced') and providing the default value ('default: 50 (per profile)'), which goes beyond the schema's description. This extra context helps the agent understand the parameter's practical significance.

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 verb ('Set') and the resource ('ez_landing_speed'), and explains its function as the rate of throttle reduction during EZ landing. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_ez_landing_limit and set_ez_landing_threshold, which control different aspects of EZ landing.

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 implies that this tool is used to configure the EZ landing speed parameter, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide any contextual guidance such as prerequisites or side effects. The presence of sibling tools like get_ez_landing_speed and set_ez_landing_limit suggests a family of related settings, but no comparison is offered.

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