debuggerSetBreakpoints

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

Annotations only indicate non-read-only and non-destructive, but the description adds crucial behavioral context: breakpoints persist and affect other users running the same code. This goes beyond annotations and is essential for safe usage.

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?

Three concise sentences with no fluff: purpose first, then timing, then persistence. Every sentence adds value and the critical ordering constraint is front-loaded.

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 10-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, timing, and side effects. It lacks explicit return-value details, but these are less critical given the schema documentation and the described id-based deletion mechanism.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond schema, but it does hint at the breakpoints structure. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 function: setting breakpoints on lines or statements for the upcoming debug session. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like debuggerSetVariableValue and debuggerListen by focusing specifically on breakpoint creation.

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?

Provides explicit timing guidance ('Set them BEFORE debuggerListen') and explains the lifecycle (survive until deleted, ids are used for deletion). This tells the agent when to invoke and implies when not to (e.g., when deletion is intended).

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