get_angle_feedforward_smoothing_ms

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data type (UINT8) and valid range (10–250), which adds transparency. However, it does not mention what the return value looks like or any potential errors. For a simple getter, this is adequate but not thorough.

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, efficient sentence that immediately states the purpose and follows with the technical details in brackets. No superfluous words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 getter with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and the parameter's specification. It could be improved by noting that it returns the current value of the setting, but overall it is complete enough for an AI to use correctly.

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 no parameters, so the description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema. According to guidelines, 0 parameters gets a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add param info.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and the resource ('angle_feedforward_smoothing_ms'), and explains the parameter's purpose ('Smoothing applied to angle feedforward signal'). The range and default value are provided, which distinguishes it from other get_* siblings like get_angle_feedforward.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the 'get' prefix and context of sibling tools imply it is for reading the current value of this parameter. A clear description of when to use (e.g., 'Use to retrieve the current setting for angle feedforward smoothing') would improve.

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