obsbot_gimbal_position

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it excels: it discloses accuracy (±1°), rounding behavior, validity during moves, and that it reflects externally-initiated motion. This gives the agent a nuanced model of what the tool does beyond a simple 'getter.'

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 two sentences and front-loads the core purpose before diving into precision details. The parenthetical about noise versus precision is slightly verbose but still informative; overall it is efficiently organized.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description never specifies the return format (e.g., field names or a JSON structure), leaving an agent uncertain about how to interpret the result. The undocumented 'camera' parameter further reduces completeness, so important information for invoking the tool correctly is missing.

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 schema has one parameter ('camera', a string) with 0% description coverage, and the description never mentions the camera parameter at all. Since the schema provides no meaning beyond its type, and the description does not compensate, an agent has no idea what to pass for this parameter.

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 states a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('the gimbal's current absolute yaw/pitch in degrees'), with units and sign conventions. It is clearly distinguished from sibling tools like obsbot_gimbal_move and obsbot_gimbal_recenter, which perform actions rather than read state.

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?

It implies usage for querying the current gimbal position and even notes it reflects motion from external actions like speed moves, recenter, and tracking, which helps an agent know it is useful for live monitoring. However, it never explicitly says when not to use it or contrasts it with move/recenter, so it falls just short of a fully explicit routing guideline.

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