SERVOSTAR drive parameters

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral load. It adds useful context: the data comes from files kept by AMC and values are enriched with dictionary meanings. However, it does not explicitly state read-only safety, permission requirements, or error behavior for invalid axes.

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 three efficient sentences that front-load the core action and follow with filtering and enrichment details. The parenthetical file names add provenance without derailing the flow.

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 a read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides enough context about what is returned (a parameter set with per-value dictionary meanings) and how filtering works. It could say more about output shape or edge cases, but nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description reinforces the optional filtering behavior but adds no syntax, format, or interaction details beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ("Return") and resource ("Kollmorgen SERVOSTAR parameter set") and scopes it to "one axis drive," which implicitly distinguishes it from compare_drive_parameters. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, keeping it just short of a 5.

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 explains optional filtering by parameter names or substring, which is parameter usage rather than tool-selection guidance. It does not state when to use this tool versus explain_drive_parameter or compare_drive_parameters, leaving the choice implied by the resource scope.

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