movej

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the basic action of sending joint angles and moving joints, but omits critical behavioral traits like safety implications, side effects of motion, error handling, or whether it blocks. The description adds minimal context beyond the parameter list.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and covers all parameters in a single paragraph. It is efficient without being verbose, though it mixes overall purpose and parameter details in a way that could be better structured.

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 complexity (robot motion) and lack of output schema, the description fails to explain what happens after sending the command (e.g., whether it blocks, returns success/failure). It does not link to related sibling tools like connect_ur or get_actual_joint_pose, leaving gaps for practical use.

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 0%, so the description compensates by listing each parameter (IP, q, a, v, t, r) with brief explanations. However, it does not specify units for q (e.g., radians vs degrees) or the expected format for the array. The descriptions add some meaning but have gaps in detail.

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 new joint poses to a robot at a specified IP, rotating each joint to given radians. It specifies the verb '发送' (send) and resource '关节姿态' (joint pose), differentiating it from linear movement tools like movel, but does not explicitly contrast with siblings.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., movel). There is no mention of prerequisites such as establishing a connection or ensuring the robot is in a proper mode. The description lacks context for appropriate usage.

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