get_gyro_notch1_hz

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that 0 disables the notch and notes the parameter type (UINT16) and default value. However, it does not mention any side effects, read-only nature, or error conditions, which are important for a mutation-free getter.

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 usage hint and type/default annotation. Every part is informative and no words are wasted.

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?

While there is no output schema, the description explains what the tool returns (the centre frequency) and its significance (0 = disabled, for persistent resonances). It is mostly complete for a simple getter, though it could explicitly state the unit (Hz) which is implied by the name.

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 is not required to add parameter meaning. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description includes the type and default (UINT16, default 0) which adds value 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 clearly specifies the verb 'Get' and the resource 'gyro_notch1_hz', explaining it is the centre frequency of static gyro notch 1, with 0 meaning disabled. This distinguishes it among many sibling getter tools for different 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 advises 'Use for specific persistent resonances not handled by dynamic notch', providing clear context on when to apply this tool. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use it, leaving some ambiguity.

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