ghidra_decompile

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

The description merely restates the tool's function and provides no behavioral details beyond the name. Since no annotations are provided, the agent gets no information about whether this is a read-only operation, what the output looks like, how it handles a missing functionName, or any side effects.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It earns its place and is appropriately front-loaded.

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 absence of annotations and an output schema, the description is too minimal to provide adequate context. It omits important information about the decompilation output format, the role of the optional functionName parameter, and how this tool fits among the many binary analysis sibling tools.

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 input schema already describes both parameters (filePath and functionName), so with 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema already provides.

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 the tool decompiles binary functions using Ghidra. The verb 'decompile' and resource 'binary functions' are specific, and the mention of Ghidra distinguishes it from sibling tools like ghidra_analyze, radare2_analyze, and pestudio_analyze.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only states what it does, not when to use it, when not to use it, or what the prerequisites are. The description provides no exclusions or alternatives.

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