ida_get_pseudocode_all_functions

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It reveals that it starts from the first function and respects a limit, which is useful. However, it does not mention side effects, potential resource usage, return format, or edge cases such as when limit exceeds function count. It is minimal but non-misleading.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word adds value. It is concise and well-structured with no 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool, the description covers the core behavior and a key starting-point detail. However, without an output schema, it neglects to mention the return structure (e.g., map of function names to pseudocode) or behavior when limit exceeds available functions. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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% because the only parameter 'limit' has a clear description in the schema. The tool description reinforces the parameter by saying 'up to limit functions', but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Thus, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 decompiles functions using Hex-Rays and returns pseudocode, with a limit and starting point. It specifies 'up to limit functions' and 'Starts from the first function', which distinguishes it from single-function decompile siblings like ida_decompile.

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 phrase 'Useful for bulk analysis' implies when to use it, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like ida_decompile or mention when not to use. It provides a use case but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool references.

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