get_imu_process_denom

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It discloses the value range (1-4) and default (2), and explains the impact on CPU load and accuracy. However, it does not mention that this is a read-only operation or any potential side effects, which is standard for getters but could be more explicit.

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 concise: two sentences plus a technical specification in brackets. It efficiently conveys the purpose, meaning, range, default, and trade-off. One sentence could be slightly more polished, but overall well-structured.

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 parameter retrieval tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the value is, its range, default, and practical implications. No additional information is needed for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 in the input schema, so the description provides all necessary semantic context. It explains what the retrieved value represents, its units (relative divisor), and its effect. This fully compensates for 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 tool retrieves the 'imu_process_denom' parameter and explains its purpose: IMU attitude update rate divisor relative to gyro task rate. The verb 'Get' and resource are explicit, and the description distinguishes it from other getters by providing the specific parameter meaning.

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 implicitly guides usage by explaining the trade-off between CPU load and attitude accuracy, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Given that this is a simple getter with no sibling read alternatives for the same parameter, the guidance is adequate but not explicit.

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