set_gps_provider

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

The description adds the default value of UBLOX in brackets, which is not in the schema. However, it does not disclose any other behavioral traits (e.g., whether the change persists, requires reboot, or affects other settings). No annotations are provided to fill this gap, but the tool is simple enough that the omission is acceptable.

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, using one sentence plus a recommendation and a default note in brackets. It is well front-loaded with the core 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?

For a simple setter with one parameter, the description is fully complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, what values to use, and the default. No output schema is needed, and the parameter semantics are fully covered.

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 describes the 'value' parameter as 'Value for gps_provider (UINT8)', but the description adds crucial semantics: it specifies the allowable values (UBLOX and NMEA) and the default (UBLOX). This significantly enhances understanding beyond the raw schema.

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 GPS provider protocol (gps_provider). It identifies the resource (gps_provider) and the action (set), and it distinguishes from sibling tools like set_gps_auto_baud by specifying the exact parameter being set.

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 explicitly recommends using UBLOX for UBlox modules, calling it 'significantly more reliable than NMEA'. This gives clear guidance on value selection, but does not specify when not to use the tool or mention alternative approaches.

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