set_rc_smoothing_debug_axis

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only mentions the effect ('expose in ... debug fields') and a debug mode condition. It omits behavioral traits like persistence, validation, side effects, or whether changes require a reboot.

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: two lines with no redundant words. The structure is straightforward: first line identifies the tool, second line provides purpose and type/default info. No wasted 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 configuration tool with one parameter, the description misses critical details: the full set of valid axis values (e.g., ROLL, PITCH, YAW) and what happens on invalid input. Without an output schema, the description should be more self-contained.

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%, but the description adds value by stating the default ('ROLL') and the debug mode context. However, it does not list all valid axis values, which would further clarify the parameter meaning.

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' and the resource 'rc_smoothing_debug_axis', with specific context ('Which axis to expose in the RC smoothing debug fields'). It distinctively describes a configuration action, differentiating it from its 'get' sibling and other set tools.

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?

Usage is implied by the context (set debug axis for RC smoothing), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or conditions. The description does not exclude any scenarios.

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