rig

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry this burden. It lists operations like 'take_control' and 'release_control' but doesn't disclose whether any are destructive, require permissions, or have side effects.

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 relatively short but is a run-on list of operations without clear structure. It could be more organized but is not excessively long.

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 no output schema, annotations, and 0% parameter coverage, the description should provide more details on return values, operation-specific inputs, and behaviors. It lacks completeness.

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%, and the description lists operation names but does not explain the 'value' parameter for each operation. While it adds some meaning, it's insufficient for an agent to know how to construct valid inputs.

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 explicitly states it's for rig control and lists many operations (get/set frequency, mode, etc.), so the resource and actions are clear. However, it lacks a concise summary and is a bit messy.

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 siblings like 'frequency' or 'controls'. The list of siblings includes similar-sounding tools, but no differentiation is provided.

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