set_yaw_motors_reversed

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 mentions reversing PID output sign but does not disclose persistence (if saved), need for reboot, or side effects. This is insufficient for a setting tool.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Concise and front-loaded. Could include more detail without being verbose, but structure is good.

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 set tool with one parameter, the description covers purpose and use case. However, it lacks behavioral details (persistence, reboot) and doesn't clarify parameter values. Output schema is absent, so no return info needed. Adequate but incomplete.

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 has 100% coverage but the parameter description is vague ('Value for yaw_motors_reversed (INT8)'). The tool description hints at accepted values via '[INT8, default: OFF]' but does not specify exact values (e.g., 0/1, ON/OFF). Adds minimal clarity beyond 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?

Description clearly states 'Reverse yaw PID output sign' and provides a specific use case 'Use when motor spin direction is swapped from normal'. This distinguishes it from the getter sibling (get_yaw_motors_reversed) and other set tools.

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 explicitly states when to use it (when motor spin direction is swapped). However, it does not mention when not to use or provide alternatives. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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