For the $ [[5,1,3]] $ code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-qubit_error_correcting_code $ X^{\otimes 5} $ implements logical $ X $ and $ Z^{\otimes 5} $ implements logical $ Z $. A less common gate is the facet gate $$ F = \tfrac{e^{- i \pi /4}}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix} 1 & -i \\ 1 & i \end{pmatrix} \propto H S^\dagger $$ The conjugation action of $ F $ on Paulis is by cycling: $$ X \to Y, \quad Y \to Z, \quad Z \to X. $$ $ F^{\otimes 5} $ implements logical $ F $. See What are the transversal gates of the $[[5,1,3]]$ code?
How do we know that the $ [[5,1,3]] $ code doesn't have weakly transversal implementation of other gates, for example $ S $ or $ H $? In other words, is it possible that there is some (weakly) transversal physical gate $$ \bigotimes_{i=1}^{5} g_i $$ which implements logical $ S $ or $ H $ on the codespace? Here all the $ g_i $ are in $ U(2) $ but they are not all assumed to be equal.
For completeness we give the following definitions:
A logical single qubit unitary is implemented in a transversal manner if it is implemented by individual operations on each qubit $i$. So $$ \bigotimes_{i=1}^{n} g_i $$ We say that a gate is strongly transversal if the operation on each set of identically labelled qubits is the same for each and every label. So $$ \bigotimes_{i=1}^{n} g_i $$ with all the $ g_i $ equal.
Relevant related questions include
What are the transversal gates of the $[[5,1,3]]$ code?
and
Weakly transversal gates for the $ [[15,1,3]] $ quantum Reed-Muller code