pwndbg_info_registers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It explains that the tool displays registers and accepts an optional register name, but doesn't mention side effects, requirements (like active session), or error conditions. It's adequate but lacks depth.

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-line description with a clear topic sentence and concise argument list. No redundant information; every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

With an output schema present, return value details are unnecessary. However, the description omits prerequisites (e.g., an active debugging session) and doesn't explain how the tool fits among siblings. It's minimally complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It defines session_id and register, noting register is optional. However, it doesn't specify valid register names or format, leaving the agent with limited guidance.

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 'Display CPU registers' clearly states the tool's action and resource. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'pwndbg_stack' or 'pwndbg_frame_info', the purpose is unambiguous for an agent.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only lists arguments without any context about when it's appropriate or when to prefer other tools like 'pwndbg_telescope' or 'pwndbg_context'.

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