Read PMDG Variable

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

Annotations already communicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond those annotations by explaining the PMDG SDK data broadcast mechanism and the options.ini prerequisite, which is exactly the kind of deployment detail an agent cannot infer from hints alone.

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 tightly structured and front-loaded: the core read operation, the supported aircraft, and the critical configuration requirement. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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 that an output schema exists, annotations cover safety, and the input schema is fully documented, the description is mostly complete. It supplies the key environmental prerequisite and data categories, though it could briefly mention when not to use it in favor of a non-PMDG read 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 schema covers both parameters fully, including the name description, examples, and variant enum, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little parameter-specific meaning beyond reinforcing that the data field is read by name and applies to 777/737 variants.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Read a PMDG aircraft data field by name (777 or 737 NG3)'. It also enumerates what can be read (switch positions, annunciators, MCP values, fuel, FMC data), making the tool's scope clear and distinct from generic simvar/lvar readers.

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 gives clear operational context, including the requirement that 'EnableDataBroadcast=1' must be set in the aircraft's options.ini. However, it does not explicitly compare against sibling tools like msfs_get_lvar or msfs_get_simvar, so an agent must infer when this PMDG-specific tool is preferred.

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