set_rpm_limit_p

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 discloses the parameter type, range, and default, but does not mention behavioral aspects like whether changes persist immediately or require a save/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 extremely concise and front-loaded, covering purpose, prerequisite, data type, range, and default in a single line. No superfluous 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?

The description is nearly complete for a simple single-parameter setter, including the required feature flag and value constraints. It does not specify persistence behavior, but overall it provides sufficient context for the agent.

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% with a description for the parameter. The tool description adds the default value of 25, which is not in the schema, providing marginal extra value. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 rpm_limit_p: P gain for RPM limiter controller', identifying the verb and resource. While it implicitly differentiates from sibling tools like set_rpm_limit_i or set_rpm_limit_d by specifying 'P gain', it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 provides a prerequisite ('Requires: USE_RPM_LIMIT') indicating when the tool is applicable. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives, such as suggesting set_rpm_limit_i for integral gain.

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