get_feedforward_max_rate_limit

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully explains the behavioral effect of the parameter: it reduces feedforward as sticks approach maximum deflection, with a specific threshold example. It also discloses the valid range (0-200) and default value (90), providing complete behavioral context.

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 a single, well-structured sentence followed by a brief tuning note. Every sentence adds value: purpose, behavior, example, range, default, and usage advice. No wasted words.

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 tool has no input schema, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, parameter meaning, range, default, and a tuning recommendation. It does not explicitly state the return value format, but the context implies it returns a UINT8. Overall adequate 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 no input parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. According to the rules, for 0 parameters baseline is 4. The description adds no additional parameter semantics but does explain the meaning of the value that would be returned.

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 the feedforward_max_rate_limit parameter and explains its function: reducing FF as sticks approach max deflection. It also provides a specific example (90 = cut at 90% travel). This distinguishes it from sibling tools which either set or get other parameters.

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 concrete usage scenario: 'Raise to 92–95 for crisper move entry on responsive builds.' While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use or compare to alternatives, the single-purpose nature of the tool makes usage clear.

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