get_crash_info

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

Without annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It only states a read action ('Get information') but does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, whether it requires a session, or any side effects. This lack of detail impedes safe invocation.

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 a single, concise sentence. It is appropriately sized for a simple parameterless tool, though slightly more context (e.g., what kind of information) would not detract from conciseness.

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 or annotations, the description is the sole source of context. It conveys the tool's purpose but omits what specific information is returned, leaving the agent to infer the exact payload. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details; it is sufficient that it names the resource being queried.

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 information about the current crash dump and session. It distinguishes from siblings like list_crash_dumps (listing all dumps) and get_bpftrace_info (BPF info), though it does not explicitly mention these alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs. siblings or any prerequisites. For example, it does not indicate that an active crash session must be started first, leaving ambiguity about proper invocation order.

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