set_gyro_offset_yaw

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

With no annotations, the description provides unit (tenths of degrees/s), range (-1000 to 1000), default 0, and data type (INT16). It explains the effect on yaw drift, but does not disclose whether changes take effect immediately, require reboot, or are persistent.

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 concise sentence followed by a parenthetical with technical details. It is front-loaded with the purpose and has no superfluous content.

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, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and parameter details. It could mention persistence behavior but is otherwise 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?

The input schema already describes the parameter fully (100% coverage). The description adds context by explaining the parameter's role in correcting drift and reiterating the range and default, providing additional meaning beyond the 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 verb 'Set', the resource 'gyro_offset_yaw', and explains it as 'Manual yaw gyro trim (tenths of degrees/s)'. It distinguishes from siblings like set_acc_trim_* by specifying it's for yaw drift when trim sticks or acc trim are insufficient.

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 states when to use: 'Use to correct persistent yaw drift if trim sticks or acc trim are not sufficient.' It implies alternatives are considered first, but does not name sibling tools explicitly.

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