pwndbg_stackf

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

The description mentions that it dereferences memory from $sp to $bp, which provides key behavioral detail. However, it does not disclose whether the tool has any side effects, error conditions, or performance implications. Given no annotations, the description carries the full burden and is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise, providing a clear summary and additional details in a structured format. It avoids unnecessary words but could be slightly more compact. Overall, it is well-organized.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema (not detailed in description). The description explains the core functionality and the parameter sufficiently. Given the context, it is fairly complete, though more differentiation from siblings would improve completeness.

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 sole parameter session_id is described as 'The UUID of the session.' This adds meaning beyond the schema's type-only definition, but does not explain how to obtain or use it. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates partially.

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 shows the entire current stack frame contents, and specifies the range from $sp to $bp. It is specific about what it does, but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling pwndbg_stack, which may have a different scope.

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 vs alternatives, or when not to use it. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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