ppsspp_memory_map

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'READ-ONLY' line is redundant. It does add useful return-shape context ('{ranges[], mapping, text}') and the region taxonomy, but no deeper behavioral details about pagination, errors, or session requirements.

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?

Four labeled one-line sections deliver purpose, usage, behavior, and return shape with zero filler. The purpose is front-loaded and every sentence contributes meaningful information.

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 tool with a single documented parameter, strong annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the essential contract needed to call it correctly. Missing sibling guidance is a minor secondary concern, not a completeness gap.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the session_id parameter is already documented as 'Active session ID.' The description merely repeats 'session_id' without adding semantic details such as format, validity, or how a session is obtained.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get the PPSSPP memory region map (user / kernel / VRAM ranges)'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling memory tools such as read_memory or disassemble by focusing on memory region ranges rather than contents.

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 'USAGE: session_id' line only restates the parameter requirement and gives no contextual guidance. It does not mention when to choose this tool over related siblings like read_memory, memory_info_search, or convert_address, nor does it state any exclusions or prerequisites.

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