set_rx_max_usec

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 tool sets a value and gives the default, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it affects arming, requires reboot, or has any constraints beyond the schema's integer range).

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 with additional info in brackets. It is extremely concise and front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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 with no output schema, the description adequately covers the parameter meaning and default. However, it lacks usage context, such as when to modify this setting relative to get_rx_max_usec or set_rx_min_usec. Overall, it is minimally viable.

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% (only one param), so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that the value is the 'longest channel pulse width considered valid' and providing the default (2115), which helps the agent understand the parameter's purpose.

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 rx_max_usec: Longest channel pulse width considered valid.' It identifies the tool's action (set), the resource (rx_max_usec), and its meaning. This distinguishes it from siblings like set_rx_min_usec.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, common scenarios, or typical values, which is especially lacking given the large number of sibling set_* tools.

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