get_gyro_overflow_detect

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

No annotations are present, and the description claims the tool 'detects' and 'disarms,' which may be misleading for a read-only configuration retrieval. It does not clarify that the tool merely reads the current setting.

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 short but includes redundant repetition of the tool name. It is not overly verbose, but the phrasing could be more efficiently structured to convey purpose without repetition.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns. It only mentions detection and disarming, omitting that it likely returns a numeric value or setting state. The return format and behavior are unclear.

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, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter info, but baseline for zero parameters is 4. The mention of '[UINT8, default: ALL]' appears to describe the return type, not parameters.

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 states it 'detects gyro ADC saturation and disarms,' but as a 'get' tool, it likely reads a configuration value rather than performing detection. The purpose is somewhat clear but ambiguous; it could be interpreted as an action rather than a read operation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling 'set_gyro_overflow_detect' implies a pairing, but no explicit context or exclusions are provided.

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