set_feedforward_yaw_hold_gain

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must explain behavioral effects. It does explain the effect on FF signal and I-term, but it does not disclose whether the change is immediate or requires reboot, nor does it mention any side effects or dependencies. It provides range and default, which adds some transparency.

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 explaining the function and a bracket with range and default. Every element adds value without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the tool's purpose.

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 the tool's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, effect, valid range, and default. It could mention if a reboot is needed, but overall it is sufficiently complete 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%, but the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains the purpose of the parameter (counteracting I-term under-yaw), which is not in the schema's description. This aids understanding of when to adjust this value.

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 action 'Set feedforward_yaw_hold_gain' and explains the resource's function: 'Sustains a residual FF signal in yaw after the stick is released, counteracting I-term under-yaw.' This distinguishes it from sibling setters like set_feedforward_yaw_hold_time, which target a different parameter.

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?

While the description implies the tool is for tuning yaw hold behavior, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., when to adjust gain vs time). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, but the purpose is clear enough for basic usage.

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