get_param

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly labels the operation 'L0 read-only', which is a key safety/behavior trait, but does not cover error cases or response details; the output schema likely handles return values.

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 one concise sentence, front-loads the action, and includes an inline example without wasted words.

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 simple read-only parameter getter, the description covers the core operation, parameter semantics, and read-only nature. The presence of an output schema removes the need to describe return values, making the description complete for the tool's complexity.

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 input schema has no descriptions and 0% coverage, but the description fully compensates by explaining param_name as a full parameter path, giving a concrete example, and noting that 'name' is an accepted alias. Both parameters are effectively defined.

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 specifies the verb 'Read' and the resource 'ROS parameter', clearly identifying the tool's purpose. It also distinguishes from sibling set_param by emphasizing read-only behavior.

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 implies usage for reading a parameter and provides a concrete path example, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention exclusions. The agent must infer contextual fit from sibling tool names.

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