get_dyn_idle_p_gain

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it is a read operation, returns a UINT8 value (range 1-250, default 50), and provides tuning advice. This compensates for the lack of output schema and ensures the agent understands the tool's safe, non-destructive nature.

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: two sentences plus a bracketed specification. No redundant words, and the key information (purpose, data type, range, default, tuning hint) 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 tool with no output schema, the description provides all necessary context: what it does, the value range, default, and when to adjust it. This fully equips an agent to select and invoke the tool 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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description has no burden to add parameter details. The baseline score of 4 applies since the schema coverage is 100% and no parameters exist.

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 it retrieves the P gain of the dynamic idle RPM controller, using the verb 'Get'. It specifies the resource and includes a tuning hint ('Reduce if idle causes oscillation'), making the purpose unambiguous and distinct among many sibling 'get_' tools.

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 clear when-to-use hint ('Reduce if idle causes oscillation'), implying the tool is useful for diagnosing or adjusting idle oscillation. No explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance is given, but the context is sufficient for its simple role.

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