motor_state

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds 'detailed' but doesn't specify what state variables are returned, error behavior, or side effects. With annotations present, a 3 is appropriate for limited added context.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple (1 param, no output schema), but 'detailed observable state' is vague – an agent doesn't know what fields to expect. Sibling tools like motor_position give a hint, but the description doesn't enumerate state dimensions. It's adequate for basic use but lacks specificity.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the single parameter 'port' is fully defined by its enum (A/B/C). The description doesn't add parameter-specific meaning, but the schema makes the parameter clear. It doesn't compensate beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline 3 is fair.

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?

Description states 'Read detailed observable state for one motor' – a specific verb, resource, and scope. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like motor_position (which likely gives only position) and motor control tools. The adjective 'detailed' differentiates it as a more comprehensive read.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. 'Detailed' implies it's for fuller state vs. motor_position, but the description doesn't name alternatives or conditions. Usage is implied but not stated.

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