get_wheel_values

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the read operation, lists specific memory offsets and their meanings, and mentions the offsets are verified from FiveM/IKT. However, it does not discuss error cases or side effects, though as a read tool, transparency is high.

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 well-structured: a brief summary, a list of offsets with meanings, and separate Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is informative and there is no waste.

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 straightforward: read wheel values by index. The description covers input parameter, what is read (offsets), and mentions return type (current values). An output schema is present, so return details are covered there. Could mention that it is read-only and safe, but overall complete.

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 0%, but the description provides clear semantics for the wheel_index parameter ('0=FL, 1=FR, 2=RL, 3=RR typically'), which is essential and adds significant value beyond the bare 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?

Clearly states it reads current wheel values using specific offsets, listing each offset's meaning. Distinguishes from siblings like set_wheel_value and find_wheel_visual_offsets by focusing on reading known offsets.

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?

Describes what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., find_wheel_visual_offsets for finding offsets, set_wheel_value for writing). Usage context is implied but not clarified.

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