rattus_heartbeat

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states 'Uses open serial port' but does not disclose potential side effects, prerequisites (like serial_open), or whether this is a read-only or mutating operation. The heartbeat streaming behavior is implied but not detailed.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action, and the context is mentioned early. It is efficient, albeit slightly under-specified in detail.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is partially complete: it covers the purpose and main parameter semantics via schema defaults, but lacks behavioral context and usage guidance. It is a minimum viable description, not comprehensive.

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 50%, and the description only implies the timing (durationMs and periodMs) without explaining vMmS and omegaMradS. The schema provides descriptions for periodMs and durationMs, but the two velocity parameters remain undocumented, so the description adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 the specific action (send CMD_TWIST heartbeats at ~20 Hz) and the resource (serial port), which distinguishes it from simple command tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from the sibling rattus_send_twist, which likely has a similar purpose.

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 mentions a specific context ('Phase 2.7 soak / link-up') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool instead of rattus_send_twist, nor any exclusion criteria. The agent is left to infer the appropriate usage context.

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