get_scheduler_relax_osd

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It explicitly says 'Get', implying a read-only operation, and gives the value, range, and default. This is transparent for a simple getter, though it could mention that it does not modify any state.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes all essential details (type, range, default) without extra words. Every part adds value.

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 simple tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers what the tool does, the data type, range, and default. It could be improved by explicitly stating the return format, but it is already effective.

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 no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by explaining what the tool retrieves and the expected value characteristics (type, range, default). This goes beyond the schema and is fully helpful.

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 it gets 'scheduler_relax_osd' and explains it is 'Scheduler relaxation time for OSD task'. It also provides the data type (UINT16) and range (0–500) with default value, distinguishing it from siblings like get_scheduler_relax_rx by specifying 'for OSD task'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like get_scheduler_relax_rx, the description does not help an agent decide which to use. It lacks any usage context or prerequisites.

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