session_find_function

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full transparency burden. It does not disclose matching semantics (exact vs substring, case sensitivity), whether it searches decompiled code/assembly/symbols, or what the results look like. The examples hint at acceptable input but not behavioral details, leaving significant ambiguity.

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 entire description is a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and object. Every part is useful, and the examples are integrated efficiently 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?

For a one-parameter search tool, the description adequately explains what to pass, but it omits return value structure and matching scope. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, these omissions leave moderate gaps for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke the tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and a single 'name' string parameter, the description adds essential meaning by explaining it is a function name and offering examples. It gives concrete acceptable patterns, but does not specify constraints like wildcards or exact syntax, so it's not a perfect 5.

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: 'Find all sessions that mention a specific function name' with concrete examples ('NtUserSetWindowPos' or 'win32k!NtUser'). This verb+resource+scope construction distinguishes it from sibling tools like session_find_address, which searches by address.

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 usage context is implied through the description—use this when you need to locate sessions mentioning a function—but it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like session_search or session_find_address. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided, so it falls short of a clear 4.

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