get_sample_rate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It communicates that this is a passive observation of the current sample rate and specifies the unit, but it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, has no side effects, or requires an established connection. This is minimal but not misleading.

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, front-loaded phrase with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a parameterless getter and 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?

For a simple zero-parameter getter with no output schema, the description covers the essential return value and unit. It does not mention operational prerequisites like connection state, but this is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema already shows an empty properties object, so there is nothing meaningful to add. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description introduces no unnecessary parameter-related details.

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 clearly identifies the resource ('current sample rate') and its unit (Hz), and 'current' distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_sample_rate and get_supported_sample_rates. It lacks an explicit verb like 'get' but the meaning is unambiguous.

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 word 'current' implies this reads the active sample rate, which helps distinguish it from set_sample_rate or get_supported_sample_rates. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives or any exclusions.

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