set_pitch_rate_limit

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Hard cap on pitch rate' and the default, but omits behavioral details such as whether changes persist, require reboot, or have side effects on flight dynamics.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the tool name and purpose, containing no superfluous information.

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 single-parameter setter, the description is adequate but lacks context about the effect on flight controller behavior or units. It could mention that this limits the maximum pitch rate during flight.

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 schema has 100% coverage, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds value by specifying the type (UINT16) and default value (1998), clarifying the effective range beyond the schema's generic integer constraints.

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 'Set pitch_rate_limit: Hard cap on pitch rate', which is a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_roll_rate_limit and set_yaw_rate_limit.

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 implies the tool is used to set a hard cap on pitch rate, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or any exclusions. It is minimally adequate.

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