get_motor_values

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states it's a read operation returning current values, but adds no further behavioral context such as side effects, permissions, rate limits, or whether values are instantaneous or averaged. This is minimal beyond the obvious.

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 with two sentences, front-loading the purpose and return value. Every word is necessary; no filler or redundancy.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains what is returned (motor values in microseconds) and that it covers all active motors. However, it lacks details on output format or behavior when no motors are active, which could be helpful.

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 zero parameters, and the description adds value by specifying the unit (microseconds) and scope (all active outputs), which goes beyond the empty schema. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 name and description clearly state it retrieves current motor output values in microseconds and returns all active outputs. However, the sibling tool 'motor_get' likely retrieves motor values as well, and the description does not explicitly distinguish between them, leaving some ambiguity.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like motor_get or motor_set. It does not specify prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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