set_gps_rescue_min_sats

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

The description discloses a behavioral effect: OSD shows 'RESCUE N/A' if below this threshold. However, without annotations, it does not specify if the change is immediate, requires reboot, or has other side effects like affecting arming only. It adds some context but is not comprehensive.

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?

Three short sentences, each adding value: purpose, behavioral effect, and range/default. No redundancy. Front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 single-parameter setter with high schema coverage and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. It explains the meaning and a concrete outcome (OSD display). Could be enhanced by noting persistence or relation to GPS rescue configuration, but adequate.

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%, so baseline 3. The description restates the range ([UINT8, 5–50, default: 8]) already present in schema, adding the default value. It explains the parameter's impact on arming and OSD, but this overlaps with the purpose rather than adding new parameter-specific details.

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 identifies the action ('Set') and the resource ('gps_rescue_min_sats'). It explains the meaning: minimum satellite count required to arm with GPS rescue. It distinguishes from sibling 'get' tools by being a setter, though doesn't explicitly differentiate among setter tools.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It mentions the OSD behavior but does not state prerequisites (e.g., GPS rescue must be configured) or contexts where this setting matters. The user must infer its purpose.

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