get_rpm_limit_d

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the prerequisite and the data type/range, which implies a read operation. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, nor does it mention potential side effects or performance characteristics.

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 concise: two sentences plus a parenthetical constraint. It front-loads the key information (Get + what it is) and then adds necessary details. Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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 zero-parameter getter, the description provides data type, range, and default, which helps the agent understand the return value even without an output schema. The behavioral context is adequate, though it could explicitly state the return format.

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 zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (vacuous). According to guidelines, baseline is 4 when there are no parameters. The description does not need to add parameter info, and the provided data type/range is sufficient.

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 D gain for the RPM limiter controller. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_rpm_limit_i and get_rpm_limit_p by specifying the gain component. The name and description together unambiguously convey the tool's purpose.

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 mentions the prerequisite USE_RPM_LIMIT but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_rpm_limit_p or get_rpm_limit_i. The context implies this is for reading the D gain parameter, but no explicit contrast or situational advice is given.

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