get_pitch_rc_rate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns a UINT8 value with a default of 7, but does not explicitly state that it is a read-only getter with no side effects. For a simple getter, this is adequate but lacks explicit side-effect information.

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: one sentence plus a parenthetical note. It is front-loaded with the tool's name and core purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating the type/default into a clearer format.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the name, type, and default. However, it does not explain the range of possible values or the meaning of the value in terms of RC stick input (e.g., units, typical range). This leaves the agent with incomplete information to interpret the output.

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 schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds value beyond the schema by specifying the return type (UINT8) and default value (7), which is useful context for the agent. Baseline for 0 params 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 description clearly states 'Get pitch_rc_rate' and specifies 'Pitch rate at stick center', distinguishing it from other pitch-related tools like get_pitch_rate_limit or get_pitch_srate. However, it does not elaborate on the functional role of this parameter within the flight controller, which slightly reduces clarity.

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. With many sibling tools (e.g., get_roll_rc_rate, get_yaw_rc_rate), it would be helpful to indicate that this is a read-only parameter for reading a specific RC rate setting, and that it pairs with set_pitch_rc_rate for modification.

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