calibrate_direct

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 that commands are sent automatically and lists options, but does not describe potential side effects, error conditions, or the tool's return value. It mentions a key precondition (printer idle) but lacks depth on what changes occur on the printer.

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 well-structured with paragraphs and bullet points, starting with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient for an AI agent 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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and parameter semantics well. However, it omits information about the tool's return value or success/failure indication, which would be useful for an agent to handle the result correctly. Overall, it is complete for basic invocation but slightly lacking in post-invocation behavior.

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 single parameter 'options' has no schema description (0% coverage), but the description thoroughly explains the allowed values (bed_leveling, vibration, flow, all), default behavior (bed leveling only), and printer-specific support. This fully compensates for the lack of schema documentation.

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 the tool sends calibration commands directly to the printer adapter, distinguishing it from the sibling run_calibrate which is a full pipeline. It specifies the method (MQTT or G-code) and lists available options, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use calibrate_direct vs run_calibrate, states the printer must be idle, and details printer-specific support for options. This provides clear context for appropriate invocation.

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