windbg_find_symbols

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It states it performs a search (read-only implied) and maps to a known cdb command, which is useful. Yet it does not disclose output format, potential for large result sets, or error behavior for malformed patterns. The description adds context but not comprehensive detail.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the essential purpose and immediately followed by a pattern example. There is no wasted text or redundancy with the schema.

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 search tool, the description is largely complete: it explains what it does, the pattern syntax, and the underlying command. It does not describe the return format, but given the simplicity and lack of output schema, the description is sufficient for selection and basic usage.

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% for the 'pattern' parameter, but the description adds a supplementary pattern format example ('mod!*func*') that reinforces and clarifies the schema's own example. This goes beyond simply restating the parameter, adding meaningful wildcard syntax context.

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 uses a specific verb 'Search' and clearly identifies the resource: symbols by pattern across modules, with the underlying cdb 'x' command. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like windbg_address_to_symbol (exact address lookup) and windbg_list_modules (module enumeration).

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 context: this is for finding symbols via wildcard patterns, not for exact address resolution. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it. The example 'mod!*func*' provides practical guidance.

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