set_rssi_src_frame_lpf_period

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full weight. It mentions data type (UINT8) and default (30), but fails to disclose important behavioral traits such as whether the setting takes effect immediately, requires a reboot, or has side effects. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 a single sentence plus a parenthetical note, front-loading the key information. No redundant words; every piece earns its place.

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 one-parameter setter without output schema or annotations, the description covers basic functionality. However, it lacks contextual completeness: no mention of persistence, reboot requirements, or link to the corresponding getter (get_rssi_src_frame_lpf_period). It is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 description coverage is 100% but minimal. The tool description adds meaningful context: the purpose of the LPF period and the default value. This goes beyond the schema description, scoring above the baseline of 3.

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 'rssi_src_frame_lpf_period', and explains the parameter's role as 'LPF period for frame-error-based RSSI smoothing'. This is specific and informative, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling setters like set_rssi_smoothing, so misses the top score.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_rssi_smoothing or set_rssi_src_frame_errors). There is no description of typical use cases or conditions that would warrant adjusting this parameter.

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