go_to_pose

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses blocking behavior via 'wait until it arrives', which is important for a motion tool. But it omits failure modes, timeout behavior, whether motion is interruptible, and safety implications.

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?

A single compact sentence with zero waste. The key blocking behavior is front-loaded alongside the primary action.

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 motion tool with no annotations, no output schema, and undocumented parameters, the description is too thin. It covers the core action and blocking wait but leaves duration semantics, failure behavior, and return expectations unspecified.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It indirectly implies that 'name' refers to a saved pose from list_poses, but it says nothing about duration_s, its default, or its effect on motion timing.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Move to a saved pose') and distinguishes it from list_poses by pointing there for pose names. It is more specific than a tautology, but lacks detail on what a 'pose' entails in this robot context.

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?

It implies the prerequisite of having a saved pose by saying 'see list_poses', which is useful routing. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings such as move_servos or play_sequence.

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