set_rssi_smoothing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the parameter type and default but does not disclose side effects, whether changes take effect immediately or require a reboot, or any dependencies. For a setter, more context on persistence and impact is needed.

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 plus a type/default notation. Front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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 parameter setter with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the parameter meaning, trade-off, and default. It lacks mention of whether the change is persistent or requires reboot, but the overall completeness is good given low complexity.

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 description is minimal ('Value for rssi_smoothing (UINT8)'). The description adds significant meaning by defining it as an LPF period and explaining the effect of higher values. Schema coverage is 100%, but the description compensates well.

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 'rssi_smoothing', defines it as an LPF period for RSSI smoothing, and explains the trade-off (higher = smoother but slower response). It distinguishes from the sibling 'get_rssi_smoothing' by explicitly being a setter.

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 adjust RSSI smoothing period but does not explicitly state when to use it or provide alternatives. No guidance on when to choose higher vs lower values or any prerequisites.

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