set_gps_rescue_sanity_checks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that setting this parameter affects rescue abort behavior, details the abort conditions, and states the default value. This is sufficient for a setter tool without hidden side effects.

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 a single sentence followed by a list of conditions and a type/default note. It is concise and front-loaded with key info, though could be slightly better structured.

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, the description covers the tool's effect, recommended value, and abort conditions. It does not explain return values or prerequisites, but given the simplicity, it is fairly complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, providing baseline of 3. The description adds value by recommending a specific value (RESCUE_SANITY_ON) and noting the default (RESCUE_SANITY_FS_ONLY), aiding the agent in selecting the correct parameter 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 tool name and description clearly indicate it sets the gps_rescue_sanity_checks parameter. The description explains the purpose: it controls aborting rescue under specific conditions. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_gps_rescue_sanity_checks and other set_* 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?

The description explicitly recommends RESCUE_SANITY_ON and lists conditions that cause abort, giving clear guidance on when to use the tool. However, it does not provide explicit exclusions or compare to alternatives.

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