stack_frameRetrieve stack frame variables for one or more function addresses, with optional timeout and instance override. Use it to inspect local variables and parameters during reverse engineering.
Get stack frame variables for function(s).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| addr | Yes | Function address(es) - single or comma-separated | |
| timeout | No | Timeout in seconds | |
| instance_id | No | Instance id override |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.9.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Get' implies a read, but it says nothing about permission/auth requirements, whether it works only during a debug session, how multiple addresses are handled, or error behavior—significant gaps for a no-annotation tool.
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?
A single short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the size leans toward under-specification rather than optimal density given the tool's moderate complexity.
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?
With no output schema, no annotations, and three parameters, the description should explain the operating context (debug session vs. static analysis, instance interplay). It supplies none of this, leaving the agent unable to predict return values or preconditions.
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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (addr, timeout, instance_id) including the comma-separated multi-address syntax are already documented in the schema. The description adds nothing beyond that, making the baseline 3 correct.
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 (Get) and resource (stack frame variables) with scope (function(s)), so an agent can tell it apart from declare_stack/delete_stack. However, it offers no explicit differentiation from those similarly-named siblings, which is exactly the 4-level bar.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. does this need a live debug session or an open database?), and no mention of alternatives such as dbg_callstack or declare_stack. The agent is left to infer everything about invocation context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.