pwndbg_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses spawning an LLDB process, optionally loading pwndbg, and returning a session ID. However, it omits details about blocking behavior, resource cleanup, or potential side effects on existing sessions.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes a parameter list and a reference link. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the tool's purpose and parameters adequately, though it could mention prerequisites like LLDB availability or error handling.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates well. It explains each parameter's purpose, default values, and the effect of providing pwndbg_path. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type and defaults.

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 starts a new LLDB session with pwndbg loaded and returns a session ID. It specifies the action and resource, which distinguishes it from session-related siblings like pwndbg_attach or pwndbg_list_sessions, though explicit differentiation is missing.

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 explains what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., pwndbg_attach for attaching to existing processes). Usage context is implied but not clearly stated.

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