ppsspp_list_addresses

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations, the description discloses that integer values ≥0x1000 are returned as paste-ready hex strings and that unknown sections produce an error listing valid sections. This is useful non-obvious behavior that helps an agent predict tool output.

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 compact, front-loaded with the purpose, and organized into clear PURPOSE/USAGE/BEHAVIOR/RETURNS sections. Every sentence carries distinct information without redundancy.

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 single optional parameter, available output schema, and annotations covering read-only/idempotent behavior, the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, filter semantics, error behavior, return format, and result shape.

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 schema already documents the optional section parameter with examples, and coverage is 100%. The description adds meaningful detail beyond the schema by clarifying that the returned hex values can be plugged directly into address parameters and that invalid sections yield a helpful error.

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 identifies a specific verb and resource: 'List the project's known address constants from addresses.yaml'. It also positions the tool as 'the single source of truth; never guess hex addresses', which clearly separates it from siblings like read_memory or convert_address.

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 the optional section filter and error behavior for unknown sections, giving clear operating context. It stops short of explicitly naming when-not-to-use or comparing against alternatives, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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