get_gps_rescue_min_sats

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that this is a read operation (Get), explains the OSD behavior ('RESCUE N/A if below this'), and specifies the parameter type/range/default ([UINT8, 5–50, default: 8]). No side effects or permissions are mentioned, but for a simple getter this is sufficient.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose in the first clause, then adds the OSD note and parameter spec efficiently. Every element earns its place.

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 that this tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, what the value means, how it manifests in OSD, and the valid range/default. There are no missing pieces 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 parameters (schema coverage 100%), and the description adds value by explaining the meaning of the returned value, its effect on OSD, and its constraints. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description meets that by providing context beyond the empty schema.

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 explicitly states the tool gets 'gps_rescue_min_sats' and defines it as the 'minimum satellite count required to arm with GPS rescue configured'. This is specific and differentiates it from the many other 'get_*' sibling tools (e.g., get_gps_auto_baud, get_gps_rescue_return_alt) by naming the exact parameter 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other related tools like get_gps_rescue_allow_arming_without_fix or set_gps_rescue_min_sats. It implies usage for reading this specific parameter but does not frame it in context of alternatives or prerequisites.

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