get_horizon_limit_degrees

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It correctly identifies it as a read operation and specifies the data type, range, and default value. However, it lacks disclosure of potential side effects (none expected) or safety guarantees, though the description is adequate for a simple 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 extremely concise and front-loaded. It states the purpose in the first clause and inline provides type, range, and default without extraneous words. Every element earns its place.

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 the lack of output schema and zero parameters, the description is fairly complete. It explains the value's meaning and numeric constraints. It could mention that it is a read-only setting, but the verb 'get' implies that already. Overall, sufficient for the tool's simplicity.

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 there is no need to explain parameter semantics. Schema coverage is 100%, and the baseline for parameter-less tools is 4. The description adds value by defining the returned value's meaning and constraints.

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 maximum attitude angle before horizon mode enforces leveling. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('horizon_limit_degrees'), and the purpose is unambiguous, distinguishing it from sibling setter and other horizon getter tools.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it is a straightforward getter, it does not mention when to prefer it over other horizon-related getters or the corresponding setter. Usage is implied but not clarified.

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