set_spa_roll_mode

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the effect of each value on PID terms, names the prerequisite (`USE_WING`), and states the default (OFF per profile). This gives sufficient insight for a simple parameter setter, though it omits whether changes persist across reboots or have side effects on other systems.

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 consists of two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately provide essential details through an inline list. Every word contributes value (purpose, value explanations, requirement, default). There is no redundancy or extraneous information.

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 tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so the description is mostly adequate. However, it fails to explain the `USE_WING` prerequisite (what it is or how to enable it) and the type annotation (UINT8) contradicts the schema's string type, which could confuse the agent. Additional context about persistence or side effects would improve completeness.

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 describes the 'value' parameter only as 'Value for spa_roll_mode (UINT8)', which is minimal. The tool description expands this by listing the three allowed values and their meanings, thereby adding meaningful context that the schema lacks. While the data type note (UINT8 vs schema's string) introduces minor confusion, the description compensates for the schema's brevity.

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 that the tool sets the 'spa_roll_mode' parameter for roll in SPA mode. It enumerates the three possible values ('I', 'PID', 'PDI_FREEZE') and explains their distinct effects, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function. This stands out among many 'set_' sibling tools by being explicit about the resource and operation.

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 notes that setting this parameter requires the `USE_WING` feature to be enabled, which is a prerequisite. However, it provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative tools in the same domain (e.g., other SPA parameter setters like set_spa_roll_center) or when to choose one value over another. The agent would benefit from explicit context on selection criteria.

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