set_gps_update_rate_hz

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

Adds behavioral context beyond schema: explains CPU load impact and potential to enable 8k8k on some boards. However, does not disclose persistence, side effects on other GPS settings, or whether a reboot is required. With no annotations, these gaps are notable.

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?

Two sentences plus a compact note with range/default. All information is essential, no redundancy. Front-loaded with key purpose and recommendation.

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 one-parameter setter, the description covers purpose, usage scenarios, and value recommendations. It does not explain return behavior, but with no output schema, the agent can infer no return value. Minor gap: no mention of persistence or immediate effect.

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 has 100% coverage with basic description, but the tool description adds meaning by explaining the rationale behind different values (10 Hz for GPS rescue, low Hz for CPU savings). This helps the agent choose appropriate values.

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?

Clearly states it sets the GPS update rate, with specific recommendations for different use cases (GPS rescue vs not). Distinguishes itself from numerous sibling set_* tools by being uniquely about gps_update_rate_hz.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use 10 Hz (GPS rescue) versus 1-2 Hz (otherwise, to reduce CPU load). Lacks explicit 'when not to use' statements but context is clear.

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