Create Ouster LiDAR bus

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, meaning the tool creates new objects. The description adds what components are created (TOP, range selection, zone maps, calibration notes), but does not disclose side effects, behavior on repeated runs, or any dependencies beyond the listed parameters.

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 that is direct and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without superfluous words or repetition of schema details.

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 an 8-parameter creation tool with no output schema and low schema coverage, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain the resulting scaffold's structure, prerequisites, or how the parameters influence the output. It is minimally sufficient but lacks completeness relative to the tool's complexity.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 25% (2 of 8 parameters described). The description mentions 'range selection' and 'zone maps' which loosely relate to ring_count and zone_count, but it does not clarify imu_port, lidar_port, device_address, active, or how these parameters are used. It adds little meaning beyond the schema's minimal descriptions.

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 creates an Ouster LiDAR scaffold, listing specific components (Ouster TOP, range selection, zone maps, calibration notes). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_hokuyo_lidar_bus or create_livox_lidar_bus which handle different sensor types.

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?

Usage context is implied by the tool name and the mention of Ouster-specific components, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It lacks clear guidance on when to choose this over other bus creation tools.

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