find_what_accesses

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states it 'collects instructions' but does not clarify whether this is a read-only operation, if it has side effects, or what the response format or limitations are.

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 and efficiently conveys the core functionality. It avoids unnecessary words, though it could be more structured.

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?

Given the complexity of memory debugging and the absence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'instructions' refers to, any prerequisites (e.g., attached process), or how to interpret results.

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 input schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It mentions 'address' and 'duration' and implies duration is in seconds, but does not explain that address is a string or provide format or defaults beyond what the schema already shows.

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 it collects instructions that read or write a given address over a duration. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool find_what_writes, which presumably only collects writes.

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 says 'Useful to find a base instruction for pointer/structure work,' providing a usage context. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like find_what_writes or advise when not to use it.

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