pwndbg_plt

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

No annotations provided; description only mentions printing symbols and the all_symbols parameter. It does not disclose prerequisites (e.g., need a running process), side effects, or limitations such as offline capability.

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?

Relatively concise with a clear header, parameter list, and reference link. The purpose is front-loaded. Minor redundancy (e.g., source/category lines) but overall efficient.

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?

Includes a link for further details, and output schema exists (not shown). However, lacks usage guidelines and behavioral context, making it minimally complete for a simple symbol-listing tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description explains session_id as 'UUID of the session' and all_symbols as 'show all PLT symbols including internal ones'. This adds value beyond the schema, though session_id explanation is minimal.

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 prints symbols from PLT sections, specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes from siblings like pwndbg_got or pwndbg_elfsections by focusing specifically on PLT symbols.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., pwndbg_gotplt, pwndbg_elfsections). The description lacks 'when not to use' or contextual hints for selecting this tool among many similar PLT-related commands.

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