set_spa_pitch_center

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 default value and type, but does not clarify side effects (e.g., persistence, reset behavior), validation, or error conditions for a mutation operation.

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 brief and includes the purpose, requirement, and parameter details in a compact form. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, though the format could be slightly more structured.

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 provides enough basic information (purpose, default, requirement). However, it lacks explanation of the SPA feature or broader context, leaving the agent to guess the role of this setting.

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 of 'Value for spa_pitch_center (UINT16)'. The description adds value by stating the default (0) and the dependency (USE_WING), but does not further clarify the parameter's unit or range constraints beyond the schema.

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 it sets the 'Setpoint centre value for pitch SPA'. The verb+resource pair is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like set_spa_pitch_mode or set_spa_pitch_width, which set different aspects.

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 mentions a prerequisite (USE_WING), but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_spa_pitch_center or other set_ tools. The agent must infer usage from context.

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