Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Betaflight MCP

Betaflight MCP

by bvandevliet
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

get_rc_smoothing_debug_axis

Retrieve which axis is exposed in RC smoothing debug fields, visible in blackbox when debug mode is set to RC_SMOOTHING. Helps configure debug output for tuning.

Instructions

Get rc_smoothing_debug_axis: Which axis to expose in the RC smoothing debug fields (visible in blackbox when debug_mode = RC_SMOOTHING). [UINT8, default: ROLL]

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_rc_smoothing_debug_axis"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0-alpha

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description provides moderate transparency by mentioning the data type (UINT8) and default value (ROLL), plus its appearance in blackbox during RC_SMOOTHING debug mode. However, it does not clarify that the operation is read-only or disclose potential side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise with two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and including type info in brackets. It avoids extraneous text but could be slightly more structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description explains where the parameter is used (blackbox debug) but omits possible axis values (e.g., ROLL, PITCH, YAW) or whether the return is numeric. For a simple getter, this is adequate but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 4. The description adds value by noting the type and default, which exceeds the empty schema's information.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves the axis exposed in RC smoothing debug fields, with context about blackbox visibility. While it distinguishes the resource from others, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar debug axis tools like get_gyro_filter_debug_axis.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling get_* tools, the description lacks explicit context for selection, such as prerequisites or when to prefer this over set_rc_smoothing_debug_axis.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools