get_i_yaw

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('Get'), which is standard. No annotations are provided, but the description does not contradict any expected behavior. It would benefit from explicitly stating that the tool only reads a configuration value without side effects.

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 concise, using a single line to convey the purpose and a hint about the data type and default. No unnecessary words, though it could be more structured with a separate line for the type/default info.

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 zero-parameter input and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain what 'i_yaw' (yaw integral gain) is used for, when to retrieve it, or its impact on flight behavior. This lack of context may hinder an agent unfamiliar with PID controllers.

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 no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description includes type and default info in brackets ('[UINT8, default: 80]'), which adds vague semantic context about the stored value, but this is not parameter-related. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves the yaw I gain. The verb 'Get' and resource 'i_yaw' are specific, and it defines the parameter as 'Yaw I gain'. However, it does not differentiate from many sibling get tools for other PID parameters, relying on domain naming conventions.

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 like get_i_pitch or set_i_yaw. The description offers no context for selecting this tool over others.

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