gdb_read_output

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is non-blocking (reads only available output), includes a timeout parameter, and is for viewing ongoing program output. This provides sufficient transparency about its behavior.

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 concise with two sentences front-loading the purpose, followed by parameter and return info. No redundant text; every sentence adds value.

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's simplicity and the existence of an output schema (likely providing return info), the description covers essential aspects: reading buffer, non-blocking, timeout. It could mention buffer clearing or error behavior, but is adequate for a straightforward read operation.

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 description explains the single parameter 'timeout' as the maximum seconds to wait for output, adding meaning beyond the schema's type-only definition. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 it reads GDB output buffer without waiting for prompt, and specifies its use for checking output of running programs. This is a specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like gdb_command which sends commands.

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 explicitly states it reads available output without waiting for a prompt, implying it's for non-blocking reads. It gives context for use but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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