get_yaw_rc_rate

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It implies a read operation via 'Get', but does not explicitly state read-only, no side effects, or any other behavioral constraints. For a simple getter, this is minimal.

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, consisting of one sentence plus a bracket note. It is not wasteful, but could be more structured (e.g., separating type/default into a sentence).

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?

The tool is simple with no parameters and no output schema, so the description provides the essential information (what is retrieved, type, default). However, it lacks details like units, range, or any explanation of the return value, which would make it more complete.

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, so the description does not need to add parameter info. The type [UINT8] and default [7] are provided, which is helpful for understanding the returned value, though these are not parameter semantics per se.

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 yaw rate at stick center, which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes itself from sibling get_rc_rate tools by specifying 'yaw'. However, it could be more precise about what 'yaw rate at stick center' means in context.

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 or when not to use this tool. It does not mention alternatives like get_roll_rc_rate or set_yaw_rc_rate, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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