get_crsf_use_negotiated_baud

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention that this is a read-only operation, what the return format is, or any side effects. The lack of annotations and minimal description leaves the agent underinformed.

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: one sentence plus a bracketed type/default. Every part serves a purpose: naming, functionality, usage context, and data type.

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?

The description mentions the return type and default but does not fully specify the output format (e.g., 'returns 0 or 1'). Given no output schema, this omission reduces completeness. It is adequate for a simple getter but not thorough.

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 does not need to explain parameter semantics. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable.

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 the tool retrieves the 'crsf_use_negotiated_baud' setting, which configures CRSF baud rate negotiation. It distinguishes from sibling getters by specifying the exact parameter name and its purpose.

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 gives a hint about when the feature is relevant ('Enable when using faster CRSF rates'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this getter versus the setter, nor provides alternatives. The guidance is implicit.

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