nds_resolve_rom_offset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates an analysis operation via 'Classify', suggesting it is non-destructive, but does not disclose output format, potential errors, side effects, or any constraints. This is minimal transparency for an unannotated tool.

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 that front-loads the purpose and scope without any fluff. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's function.

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 tool has two parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the expected return value, the meaning of 'relationships', or any usage context. The description is a minimal stub that does not provide enough guidance for an agent to confidently invoke it.

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 input schema has 2 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not describe either parameter in detail. It does imply that 'offset' refers to a ROM offset, but it does not clarify the 'rom' parameter or parameter relationships. The description adds only a minimal hint beyond the raw schema.

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 'Classify' and a specific resource 'one ROM offset', making the tool's purpose clear. It further distinguishes itself from sibling tools like nds_resolve_runtime_address by specifying the classification scope across NDS structural, file, main-binary, and overlay relationships.

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 classifying ROM offsets within NDS contexts, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. No alternative tools are named, and no when/when-not guidance is provided, so it only hints at usage context.

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