ida_status

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the basic purpose without detailing return format, error conditions, or read-only guarantees. 'Always call first' is usage guidance, not behavioral transparency.

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 exceptionally concise, using only two short sentences to convey purpose and usage priority. Every word earns its place with no redundant filler.

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 status tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is somewhat adequate but lacks details about the exact nature of 'binary info' and behavior when IDA is not connected. Given no annotations or output schema, a bit more context would make it more 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?

The tool has zero parameters, earning a baseline score of 4. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but none are needed.

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 checks IDA Pro connectivity and retrieves binary info. The phrase 'Always call first' distinguishes it from other IDA tools by establishing it as the initial prerequisite check.

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?

'Always call first' provides explicit temporal guidance for when to use this tool, implying it should precede other IDA operations. It does not name specific alternatives but establishes a clear usage context.

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