get_roll_srate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It reveals the return type (UINT8) and default value (67), and notes it reflects the 'ACTUAL system' value. This adequately hints at a read-only operation with no side effects, though it could be more explicit about safety or permissions. No contradictions with annotations (none present).

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—one sentence with minimal characters. Every word adds value: the name, the explanatory phrase, the data type, and the default. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 parameterless getter tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It explains what is retrieved, its meaning, type, and default. The phrase 'ACTUAL system' could be elaborated, but for an expert user this is sufficient. Minor omission: no explicit statement that this is a read-only operation, but it is strongly implied.

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 input schema has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description does not add parameter-related information, but none is needed. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description offers no additional semantic value beyond the schema.

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 specifies the action ('Get'), the resource ('roll_srate'), and provides context ('Roll super rate — max rate at full stick deflection (ACTUAL system)'). Although sibling tools exist for pitch and yaw, the tool name and description sufficiently differentiate by focusing on 'roll', making the purpose unambiguous.

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 (e.g., get_pitch_srate or get_yaw_srate). There is no mention of conditions, prerequisites, or situations where this tool is preferred, leaving the agent with no basis for selection.

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