get_gps_rescue_sanity_checks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains what the setting does (abort conditions), its data type (UINT8), and default value (RESCUE_SANITY_FS_ONLY). This adds significant context beyond the empty input schema. It does not mention that it is a read-only operation, but that is implicit from the tool name.

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 concise and informative, using a single sentence with a colon and listing conditions. No wasted words, but could be better structured with bullet points for readability.

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 no output schema and zero parameters, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and behavior. However, it does not list the possible enum values or explain what RESCUE_SANITY_FS_ONLY means in context. Slightly more detail would improve completeness.

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 no parameters, so schema_description_coverage is 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters. Baseline score of 4 for zero parameters is appropriate.

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 GPS rescue sanity checks configuration and explains its purpose (aborts rescue in certain conditions). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on sanity checks. However, it does not explicitly state that it is a 'getter' function, but the naming convention implies it.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. The description suggests it is a recommended setting but does not compare to set_gps_rescue_sanity_checks or other tools. No when-not-to-use information.

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