gdb_run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the tool runs the program and returns output, but fails to disclose important behavioral traits like prerequisite (program must be loaded), stops at breakpoints, blocking nature, or side effects (e.g., resetting state). Minimal disclosure.

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?

Description is very short with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more informative while remaining concise, e.g., mentioning that the program must be loaded first. Still, good front-loading.

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 simple tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context on prerequisites (program loaded), behavior (stops at breakpoints), and relationship to siblings, leaving some gaps for the agent.

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?

No parameters exist, schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). Baseline is 3 per guidelines. The description adds no parameter info, but none is needed. Score is 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?

Description clearly states the tool runs the target program in GDB (verb+resource) and equates it to the 'run' command. However, among many GDB siblings (e.g., gdb_start, gdb_restart, gdb_continue), it does not differentiate its purpose, so it is not 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like gdb_start or gdb_continue. The description only states equivalence to GDB's 'run' command, which is implicit usage context but no explicit when/when-not or alternatives.

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