get_rc

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful interpretation context — the unit (µs) and typical range 1000-2000 — but says nothing about return structure, channel count, or sampling behavior.

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 clause with a parenthetical qualifier; zero padding and the unit/range information is front-loaded alongside the purpose.

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 parameterless, annotation-covered read tool, the description supplies the essentials: current values, unit, and expected magnitude. The only real omission is differentiation from snapshot_rc_delta and channel-count specifics.

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 tool takes no parameters, so the 4 baseline applies. The description correctly implies a parameterless read of all RC channels and adds only unit context, which is appropriate.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('Valeurs actuelles des canaux RC') and adds the unit (µs) and expected range, so an agent knows exactly what is returned. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the very close sibling snapshot_rc_delta, which also deals with RC channel values.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives such as snapshot_rc_delta, nor any stated preconditions (e.g. connection state). Usage must be inferred from the name alone.

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