set_imu_dcm_kp

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the parameter type, range, and default, and explains the blending behavior. However, it does not mention side effects, whether changes are immediate or require a reboot, or any prerequisites.

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, no wasted words. Key information (purpose, effect, default, range) is front-loaded and clearly presented.

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 with no output schema, the description covers the parameter's purpose, range, and default. It could mention the corresponding get tool (get_imu_dcm_kp) for completeness, but overall is 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% (one param fully described). The description adds value by repeating the range and default in a human-readable form and explaining the parameter's role, going beyond the schema's description.

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 sets the complementary filter proportional gain, explains its effect (blending acc data with gyro integration), and provides range/default. This distinguishes it from other set_* tools by specifying a unique parameter.

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 says 'Default is suitable for all normal use,' implying when to keep the default, but does not explain when a user might need to adjust the value or compare to alternatives. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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