set_feedforward_max_rate_limit

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

Without annotations, the description explains the behavioral trait: it cuts or reduces FF at a stick travel threshold (e.g., 90% at value 90). It also gives the range and default, but doesn't disclose all possible side effects (e.g., setting to 0 or 200). Still, it adds significant transparency beyond the parameter name.

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: two sentences plus a type/range/default in brackets. Every sentence is informative—purpose, example, tuning tip. No wasted words; well front-loaded.

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 single-parameter setter with no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: behavior, interpretation, tuning guidance, and valid range. It could optionally note that this is a stick-travel-based reduction, but it's complete enough for an AI agent.

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 schema description only provides type and range. The tool description adds rich semantics: it interprets the value as percentage stick travel where FF is cut, and gives tuning advice. This goes well beyond the schema, making the parameter fully understandable.

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: 'Reduces FF as sticks approach maximum deflection.' It uses a specific verb-resource combination and distinguishes from siblings like set_feedforward_boost by explaining the unique behavior of reducing feedforward near stick limits.

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 implicitly guides usage with tuning advice: 'Raise to 92–95 for crisper move entry on responsive builds.' It provides a default and range, but doesn't explicitly state when to avoid or compare to alternatives, though the context of many feedforward siblings makes the behavior distinct enough.

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