get_actual_joint_pose

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden but only states the action. No disclosure of side effects, required connections, or whether it's read-only. The 'get' implies non-destructive, but not explicitly stated.

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?

Extremely concise, two short sentences. Information is front-loaded. No redundant 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 the simplicity of the schema and lack of annotations, the description is insufficient. It doesn't specify output format (e.g., array of angles, units), prerequisites (e.g., robot must be connected), or 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 only parameter 'ip' has no schema description (0% coverage). The description adds 'IP: robot address', which clarifies the parameter's meaning but is minimal. More detail on format or constraints would improve.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves current joint angles for a robot specified by IP. The verb '获取' (get) and resource '关节角度' (joint angle) are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like get_actual_tcp_pose.

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 to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context for prerequisites or when not to use, leaving the agent to infer 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.