ida_disassemble

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what happens on invalid addresses, or any side effects. The description simply restates the obvious operation without revealing behavioral traits.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and no filler. It earns every word while remaining appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 or annotations, the description should cover return format and error behavior. It explains the function option but omits what the disassembly output looks like (e.g., addresses, bytes, mnemonics) and how errors are handled. Core purpose is clear, but important context is missing.

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 parameters are already documented. The description adds no new meaning; 'function=true for entire function' merely duplicates the schema's 'If true, disassemble entire function.' It does not compensate for any gaps or add examples.

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 states a specific verb ('Disassemble') and resource ('instructions at an address'), clearly distinguishing this tool from other disassembly tools. The mention of 'function=true for entire function' adds a unique capability, reinforcing purpose clarity.

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 only usage guidance is 'Use function=true for entire function,' which explains a parameter option but does not provide guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like windbg_disassemble or ida_decompile. Context implies IDA disassembly, but no explicit alternatives or exclusions are given.

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