set_pid_process_denom

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the divisor effect and gives examples, but does not disclose whether changes take effect immediately, require reboot, or any side effects. This is adequate for a simple parameter setter but lacks full transparency.

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 very concise: four sentences that cover the definition, an example, target rates, and the parameter type/default. Every sentence adds value, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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 and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context through examples and target values. It could mention persistence or saving behavior, but given the nature of similar tools, it is reasonably 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 describes the 'value' parameter as 'UINT8' with a default, but the description adds significant meaning by explaining how the divisor works and providing target configurations. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3, but the description elevates it by offering practical context.

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 PID loop rate divisor and explains the relationship with gyro rate and examples. The name and description together make the purpose unambiguous, and it distinguishes itself from sibling set_* tools by providing specific context.

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 target gyro rates for specific sensor types (BMI270, ICM-42688P, MPU-6000), providing implicit guidance on when to use certain values. However, it does not explicitly state when to not use this tool or alternative approaches.

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