evaluateInDebugger

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating safe read operation. The description adds critical behavioral context: 'Session must be paused at a breakpoint'. This goes beyond annotations and informs the agent of a prerequisite, avoiding errors.

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 short sentences: first states action, second states prerequisite. No unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value. Ideal for quick consumption by an LLM.

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 description is complete in terms of usage condition but does not mention the return value or error handling (no output schema available). While the tool name implies evaluation yields a result, explicitly stating the output could 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?

Input schema has 3 parameters with full descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already handles parameter explanation.

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 evaluates an expression in an active debug session, specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like startDebugging or getDebugState by specifying the prerequisite (paused at breakpoint).

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 explicitly states the condition for use: debug session must be paused. It implies when to use (during active breakpoint pause) but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives. However, the context is clear and no sibling tool duplicates this exact function.

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