get_gyro_offset_yaw

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 states the tool returns a gyro offset value and its range. As a getter, read-only behavior is implied. It does not describe side effects or permissions, which are minimal for a 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 two sentences plus a bracketed info block. The purpose is front-loaded, and every element adds value (what, when, format). No redundant text.

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 simple getter with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, return value type, range, and default. It is complete for effective use.

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. The description compensates by specifying the returned value's type (INT16), range (-1000–1000), and default (0), which adds meaning beyond the empty schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 yaw gyro trim value ('Manual yaw gyro trim'). It specifies the unit (tenths of degrees/s) and implies it's for correcting drift. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling getters, the context is sufficient.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Use to correct persistent yaw drift if trim sticks or acc trim are not sufficient.' It does not list exclusions or alternatives directly, but the condition is clear.

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