getScopeVariables

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

With no annotations, the description carries full transparency. It details the behavior (returns scope variables grouped by type, skips global scope) and the expected context (paused state). No destructive side effects are implied, and the read-only nature is evident.

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 and well-structured, covering purpose, timing, result formatting, and parameter usage in a few sentences. Every sentence provides valuable 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?

The description is complete given the absence of an output schema. It explains what the tool returns (scope variables grouped by type) and provides necessary context (paused state, frame navigation). No critical gaps are apparent.

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 only parameter, frameIndex, is fully described in both the schema and the tool description. The description adds meaningful detail on how to use it (default 0 for topmost, increment to go up the stack), satisfying the parameter semantics requirement.

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 the tool's purpose: reading all scope variables (local, closure, module) at the currently paused call frame. It is distinct from sibling tools, which focus on control (e.g., stepping, pausing) rather than inspection.

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 instructs when to call the tool ('immediately after waitForSpecificPause or waitForPause returns') and explains how to use frameIndex for parent frames. This provides clear, actionable usage guidance beyond the schema.

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