windbg_attach

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

The annotation set is empty, so the description must carry behavioral transparency. It discloses that the process is paused on attach, which is a key side effect. However, it does not mention prerequisites such as administrative privileges or what happens to the current debugging session.

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 long, front-loads the primary action, and avoids redundancy. Every word contributes meaning.

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 attach operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides enough information to understand the tool's function and primary side effect. It could add a note about detaching or privilege requirements, but the essentials are covered.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the single 'pid' parameter with the description 'Target process ID'. The tool description reinforces this by saying 'by PID' but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 'Attach cdb to a running process by PID' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like windbg_start_executable and windbg_open_dump, which target different scenarios.

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 description implies usage for an already-running process by PID but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like windbg_start_executable or windbg_open_dump. The context is understandable but lacks explicit when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance.

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