get_output_bit_register

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

No annotations are present, and the description omits behavioral details such as side effects, permissions, error handling, or read-only nature. The tool name suggests a read operation, but the description does not confirm this.

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 with two sentences. The first sentence states the main action, and the second details parameters. No unnecessary words.

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 output schema, the description should mention the return type (boolean). It does not, but it adequately explains the input parameters. Some gaps remain regarding expected output and error conditions.

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 description adds meaning beyond the input schema by specifying that index must be in the range [0,23], which is not present in the schema. This helps the agent set valid values.

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 retrieves a boolean register value from a robot specified by IP and index, and the name matches the function. It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like get_output_double_register or get_output_int_register.

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 for reading boolean registers but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives such as get_output_double_register. No exclusions or context are provided.

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