get_gps_sbas_mode

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only or non-destructive. While 'get' implies reading, the description should confirm no side effects, especially given the lack of annotations.

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 very brief but front-loaded with the verb. However, the parenthetical format note seems out of place for a parameterless tool, and the description could be clearer without sacrificing conciseness.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides a minimal explanation of the return value (SBAS mode) but does not elaborate on possible values or their significance. The overall completeness is adequate but not rich.

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 and 100% coverage, so the baseline score is 4. The description adds a note about the value type and default ('[UINT8, default: NONE]'), which, while more about the return value, does not harm or mislead.

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 SBAS (satellite correction) system setting for the region. The purpose is specific and distinct from siblings like 'get_gps_sbas_integrity' by focusing on 'mode' rather than 'integrity', and from 'set_gps_sbas_mode' by being a getter.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description lacks context about typical usage scenarios, prerequisites, or any hint of when querying the SBAS mode is appropriate.

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