get_mid_rc

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It declares it's a read operation ('Get'), and provides value range and default. Though it doesn't mention side effects or prerequisites, for a simple getter with no parameters, this is sufficient.

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: two sentences plus bracketed type/range. Every word adds value. No redundancy. Front-loaded with key purpose.

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 simple getter with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, and value constraints. Could briefly explain what 'RC mid-point' means, but it's adequate for the target audience.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameters to describe. Schema coverage is 100% vacuously. Baseline for 0 params is 4; description adds value by providing range and default information that would otherwise be missing.

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 'Get mid_rc: RC mid-point' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling set_mid_rc by indicating this is a getter. The Futaba example further clarifies its purpose.

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?

Provides usage context: 'Match to your transmitter's stick center value' and a specific example for Futaba radios. While it doesn't explicitly exclude other uses, the context is clear. Existence of sibling set_mid_rc implies when to use this vs the setter.

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