set_gyro_overflow_detect

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 a key behavioral trait: setting this parameter enables detection of gyro ADC saturation that results in disarming. This goes beyond redundancy and adds value by explaining the safety implication.

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 two sentences plus a technical note, very concise. The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and every phrase adds value. No wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description should fully inform the agent. It explains the feature's purpose and recommended default, but fails to list possible values (e.g., OFF, ON, ALL) or their effects, making it incomplete for parameter selection.

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 covers 100% of parameters with a basic description. The description adds the type hint 'UINT8' (though schema says string, a minor inconsistency) and the default value 'ALL'. It recommends 'ALL' but doesn't enumerate possible values or their meanings, leaving ambiguity for the agent.

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's action: sets the gyro_overflow_detect parameter, which detects gyro ADC saturation and causes disarm. This is a specific verb-resource pairing that distinguishes it from the many other set_* sibling tools by naming the exact parameter and its function.

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 includes 'Recommended: ALL' which provides a value recommendation but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., get_gyro_overflow_detect). The usage is implied (change the parameter), but no prerequisites, exclusions, or context for when to set vs leave default are given.

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