movel_x

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states that the robot moves along the X-axis. It fails to disclose critical behavioral traits such as whether the movement is relative or absolute, speed/acceleration settings, blocking behavior, safety implications, or prerequisites like joint limits. This is a significant gap for a robot control 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?

The description is concise with two focused sentences, front-loading the purpose. Every element is necessary, but it could benefit from a clearer separation of parameter explanations.

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 movement tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core action. However, it lacks details about coordinate system (e.g., base frame vs tool frame), movement constraints, or error handling, which are important for a robot operation.

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 description explains both parameters: IP is the robot address and distance is in meters, adding value beyond the schema's basic types. However, it does not specify the format of the IP (e.g., IPv4) or whether distance can be negative, and the schema has 0% description coverage, so the description partially compensates.

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 moves the robot's TCP along the X-axis, with parameters IP and distance. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like movel, movel_y, movel_z by specifying the axis.

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 implicitly defines when to use this tool (for X-axis linear movement) through its name and purpose. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives, but given the clear axis differentiation, this is acceptable.

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