get_motor_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the load: it says the tool returns a live snapshot valley and explains that fatal errors are decoded with suggested fixes. It does not explicitly state read-only semantics or side-effect absence, but 'snapshot' strongly implies them.

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 first sentence front-loads the return contents; the second sentence adds practical usage timing. Every sentence contributes new information, and the tool name is not restated.

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 a single parameter and no output schema, the description nicely covers what is returned (position, voltage, temperature, status), when to call it, and how decoded errors behave. It does not list valid motor identifiers or note preconditions, but the essential usage context is present.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and only names 'motor' as a required string. The description adds only that it is 'one motor's' snapshot, not how to select the motor (e.g., name, ID, alias) or how to discover valid values via list_motors.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it identifies a single motor's live snapshot including position, supply voltage, temperature, and decoded status. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_position, get_status, or get_product_info.

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?

Provides explicit usage triggers: call after moves to confirm completion, or when the user asks where something is or if it is okay. It does not mention when to prefer alternatives, but the stated scenarios are concrete and actionable.

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