Enable motion

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

Annotations cover the write/safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), but the description adds state the annotations cannot convey: motion is locked on every connect and requires user consent before unlocking. It stops short of describing what happens if the call is made unsafely or any rate/scope limits.

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?

Three sentences, zero padding, front-loaded with the action and the unlocked capability set before the safety constraint. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema is needed for a one-parameter enablement toggle, and the description fully covers the lock/unlock lifecycle and the consent precondition. Nothing an agent needs to call this safely is missing.

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%, so the boolean is already documented, but the description reinforces its intent by pairing 'Ask the user first' with the confirmation gate, tying the parameter to a real-world consent requirement rather than leaving it as a bare flag.

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?

Specific verb (unlock/enable) plus the exact resource and the enumerated capabilities it gates: move, turn, turn_to_heading, face_object, kick. An agent can distinguish this from the individual sibling tools it unlocks.

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 states when to call it ('Ask the user first; never call this on your own initiative') and gives the rationale (motion starts locked each connection because the robot may be on a table). This is a clear when/when-not directive with no inference required.

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