get_cpu_overclock

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

The description contradicts the tool's own name and expected behavior: it says 'Overclock' (a mutation) but the tool is a getter with no parameters. No annotations exist to clarify read-only nature. This is a serious omission for a tool that should be non-destructive.

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 short but packs a misleading verb. It could be concise if accurate, but the inaccuracy makes it poor. Slightly below average due to ambiguity.

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, the description fails to explain what the tool returns. Among many sibling getters/setters, it does not clarify its role. The description is incomplete and misleading for a simple getter.

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, so the baseline score of 4 applies. The description does not add parameter-specific information, but none is needed.

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 name indicates a getter ('get_'), but the description uses the verb 'Overclock', which implies a mutation. The tool's purpose is ambiguous: it appears to both retrieve and perform an overclock action, lacking a clear, consistent verb-resource pairing.

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 a usage condition ('Use only if CPU load is too high and the board supports it') that is more appropriate for a setter. There is no guidance on when to use this getter versus the sibling set_cpu_overclock or when not to use it.

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