get_blackbox_disable_gps

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the setting type (UINT32) and default (OFF), which adds some value beyond the name. However, it does not describe the return value format (e.g., what values indicate include/exclude) or any side effects, leaving behavioral details incomplete.

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 very concise, fitting the core purpose and key details (type, default, requirement) into a single sentence. It is front-loaded with the purpose. However, it could benefit from slight restructuring to separate the requirement and type info more clearly.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should explain the return value semantics. It tells the type and default but not what the numeric values represent (e.g., 0=include, 1=exclude). This omission reduces completeness for an agent needing to interpret the result.

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 there is nothing to describe. Per the baseline rule for 0 parameters, a score of 4 is appropriate. The description does not need to add parameter info as there are none.

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 retrieves a setting to exclude GPS data from blackbox logs. It specifies the resource (blackbox_disable_gps) and action (get), distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle other data types like accelerometer or altitude.

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 mentions a prerequisite (USE_GPS) but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus other get_blackbox_disable_* tools. No alternative tools or exclusion criteria are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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