get_pitch_srate

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits. It does not mention that the tool is read-only (though implied by 'Get'), nor does it describe side effects, performance, or safety considerations. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a critical gap.

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 short (one line), which is concise, but it is unstructured and lacks separation of purpose from additional info. It reads like a fragment. While no words are wasted, a more organized presentation would improve clarity.

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?

Despite having no parameters and no output schema, the description does not fully explain the tool's purpose. It does not describe what 'pitch super rate' means or how it relates to other tools (like get_roll_srate). The context among hundreds of get_* tools is missing, making it harder for an agent to determine when this specific tool is needed.

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?

The tool has no parameters, so the input schema is empty. However, the description adds meaningful context about the return value: type (UINT8) and default (67). This goes beyond the schema, which provides no return info. The description compensates by clarifying what data the tool returns.

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 pitch super rate value, using a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'pitch_srate'. It distinguishes from setter counterparts (e.g., set_pitch_srate) and other axis-specific srates (get_roll_srate, get_yaw_srate) by name. However, the description does not explicitly state that it reads a flight controller parameter, relying on context from the many get_* tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it. Given its simplicity (no parameters), some basic context like 'Use to read the current pitch super rate setting' would help.

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