Debug Session Status

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, and the description reinforces this with 'without changing target execution' and 'diagnostic only'. It adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations, such as bounded adapter stderr and the explicit list of actions it will not perform.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose, then immediately provides usage context and exclusions. Every clause adds value and helps the agent decide correctly.

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?

For a parameterless diagnostic tool with strong annotations and no output schema, the description fully covers what it inspects, why to use it, and what it will not do. No additional context is needed for correct selection and invocation.

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 tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are trivially covered by the schema. The description appropriately focuses on behavior and usage rather than parameters, matching the baseline for parameterless tools.

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 states a specific verb ('Inspect') and concrete resources: debugger lifecycle state, selected stop, recent DAP events, and bounded adapter stderr. It explicitly distinguishes itself as diagnostic-only and clarifies that it does not resume, launch, attach, or terminate, which differentiates it from the sibling debug tools.

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?

It tells the agent exactly when to use it: before choosing another debug tool, to determine whether the session is initialized, running, stopped, postmortem, exited, or failed. It also gives clear exclusions by stating it does not resume, launch, attach, or terminate, guiding the agent toward alternative tools for those actions.

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