get_blackbox_disable_rssi

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Get blackbox_disable_rssi: Exclude RSSI data', which implies a read operation but fails to explicitly confirm no side effects. It does not describe what the tool returns or any related behavioral traits like rate limits or error conditions.

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 extremely concise, using a single sentence to convey the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the tool name and includes a clear action ('Exclude RSSI data'). No unnecessary words are present.

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 lacks essential details: it does not state that the tool returns the current setting value. It ambiguously says 'Exclude RSSI data', which could be misinterpreted as the tool performing an action rather than retrieving a configuration. Without output schema, the description should clarify the return format.

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, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). The description adds no parameter information beyond the schema, which is acceptable because there are no parameters to document. The mention of '[UINT32, default: OFF]' describes the setting's type and default, not parameters, but it does not hinder parameter 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 that this tool retrieves the blackbox setting for excluding RSSI data, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_blackbox_disable_acc or set_blackbox_disable_rssi. It explicitly mentions 'Exclude RSSI data', making the purpose specific. However, it could be more precise by indicating that it retrieves the current value of this setting.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the corresponding setter tool (set_blackbox_disable_rssi). There is no mention of prerequisites, recommended use cases, or when not to use it. Without this, an agent might misuse the tool.

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