get_magnetometer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention calibration requirements for accurate heading, potential side effects, or error conditions. It only lists outputs, which falls short of full transparency.

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, concise sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and key outputs without any unnecessary words or repetition. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 description is appropriately complete for a simple, parameterless getter. It covers the key outputs, and the existence of an output schema likely documents return structure. However, it omits the dependency on calibration for heading accuracy, which could be useful given the sibling calibrate_magnetometer tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are trivially satisfied. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds no parameter-related information, but none is needed.

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's function: retrieving magnetometer X, Y, Z readings along with heading and cardinal direction. It distinguishes itself from sibling sensor getters and from calibrate_magnetometer by specifying the magnetometer and its output components.

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 implies usage when magnetometer readings are needed, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives or prerequisites like calibration are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer context from the name and siblings.

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