pose_idle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It hints at a state-mutating reset ('arms back', 'rifle part home') but does not disclose permissions, whether it discards a current pose, or what the resulting state is. The poetic phrasing leaves real behavior unstated.

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?

It is a single short sentence, so it is not bloated, but the content is cryptic rather than front-loaded. The metaphor ('every rifle part home') trades clarity for brevity.

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 zero-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description should fully explain what state change occurs and any prerequisites. Instead it offers only a vague poetic image, leaving an agent unsure of the exact effect on the rig.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. There is no parameter semantics to add meaningfully beyond the 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?

The name pose_idle plus 'arms back on the idle pose, every rifle part home' conveys that this resets a rig's arms and rifle parts to an idle/home position. However, the phrasing is cryptic prose rather than a clear verb+resource statement, and it does not distinguish itself from siblings like pose_clip or move_part.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The siblings include pose_clip and move_part, which plausibly overlap, but the description offers no condition that would select one over the other.

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