get_acc_limit_yaw

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the getter action. It does not mention safety, connection requirements, or potential side effects, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name and type.

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?

Extremely concise: one sentence plus bracketed details. No redundant information, every element serves a purpose.

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 parameterless getter, the description is largely complete: it explains what is retrieved, the axis, and expected value characteristics. Missing are prerequisites like requiring a flight controller connection, but such context is common across all tools.

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 zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds value by documenting the expected output type (UINT16), range (0–500), and default (0), which aids output understanding.

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 states the tool gets 'acc_limit_yaw', explains it's the same as 'acc_limit' but for the yaw axis, and specifies the value range and default. It effectively distinguishes from the sibling 'get_acc_limit' tool.

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 yaw axis acceleration limit retrieval via reference to 'acc_limit', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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