get_throttle_boost_cutoff

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It adds value by specifying the parameter type, range, and default, but does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation or mention any side effects. The note on 'used by throttle_boost' provides some context, but behavioral transparency is moderate.

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 concise—one sentence plus a bracketed specification. No wasted words. However, it could be slightly more structured with explicit labels for range and default.

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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides the essential information about what is retrieved and its constraints. It does not explain the return format or how the value is used in a broader context, which would be helpful for a comprehensive understanding.

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, so the description must provide all semantic meaning. It does so by explaining the parameter's purpose, type (UINT8), range (5–50), and default (15). Since schema coverage is 100% (no params), baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond by adding full context.

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 retrieves the 'throttle_boost_cutoff' parameter, explains it as 'LPF cutoff for throttle derivative used by throttle_boost', and provides type, range, and default. This distinguishes it from hundreds of sibling 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among many get_* tools, there is no differentiation, leaving the agent to infer that it is for retrieving a specific parameter.

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