get_ibat_lpf_period

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It correctly indicates a read operation but does not disclose potential behavioral traits like latency, connection status, or that it reads a flight controller parameter. It is minimally adequate.

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?

Extremely concise: one sentence plus a brief note on type and default. Every word adds value. No unnecessary fluff.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description explains the meaning and effect of the value. It provides type and default but omits the allowed range (0-255) and whether the value is dynamic. Still, it is fairly complete for a simple getter.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds meaning by explaining the parameter's purpose and effect on OSD smoothness, which goes 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 states the resource (ibat_lpf_period) and its function: 'LPF period for the displayed current reading.' It also clarifies the effect ('Higher = smoother OSD current display') and provides type/default. This distinguishes it from sibling getters like get_vbat_display_lpf_period which is for voltage.

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 implies usage when one wants to read the LPF period for current display, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. No mention of the corresponding setter tool exists.

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