pwndbg_patch_list

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond stating it lists patches. It does not clarify if this is a read-only operation, any side effects, or required permissions. The description fails to compensate for missing annotations.

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 relatively short but includes extraneous information like source file path and URL. The core action is front-loaded, but some lines are unnecessary for an agent to understand usage.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, output schema present), the description is adequate. It clearly states the purpose and parameter, and the output schema handles return value details.

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 description explicitly describes the session_id parameter as 'The UUID of the session', adding meaning beyond the schema which only provides a title. With 0% schema description coverage, this explanation is valuable.

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 lists all applied patches, using a specific verb ('list') and resource ('patches'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like pwndbg_patch (which likely applies patches) and pwndbg_patch_revert (which reverts patches).

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 is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives. The description does not mention scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions despite having siblings pwndbg_patch and pwndbg_patch_revert.

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