set_tpa_speed_basic_delay

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains the behavioral effect ('prevents rapid gain changes') and provides the default value. It does not discuss persistence or error conditions, but for a simple parameter setter, this is adequate.

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 extremely concise: one explanatory sentence, followed by the requirement in parentheses and the type/default in brackets. Every part serves a purpose, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (single required parameter, no output schema), the description provides the necessary context: purpose, unit, default, and prerequisite. It could add details about the effect of extreme values, but it is sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 already covers the parameter type and range (100% coverage). The description adds semantic meaning: the unit (ms), the context (delay after speed change), and the default value. This goes beyond the schema's basic description.

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 a delay (in milliseconds) for speed-based TPA updates after a speed change, and explains the purpose: preventing rapid gain changes during maneuvers. This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_tpa_speed_basic_gravity.

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 includes a prerequisite ('Requires: USE_WING'), which helps agents know when this parameter is applicable. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the tool name and context among many parameter setters make usage clear.

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