disassemble_raw_offset

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It implies read-only behavior but does not explicitly state permissions, side effects, or limitations (e.g., file size, error handling). The return is mentioned but behavioral traits like idempotency are missing.

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 well-structured with a concise summary followed by properly formatted Args and Returns. It is efficient, though slightly longer than necessary. The first sentence immediately conveys the core functionality.

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 tool's complexity (6 params, 2 required) and lack of annotations, the description covers the main functionality and parameters. It explains the key difference from a sibling. However, it omits mention of potential errors (e.g., invalid offset) and is not fully complete without assuming an output schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description's Args section adds meaningful context: offset as hex string, base_address defaulting to offset, default values for size and arch, and clarifications for each parameter. This compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 reads raw bytes at a file offset and disassembles them. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'disassemble_at_address' by explicitly noting the use of raw file offset instead of virtual address.

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 provides clear context by contrasting with disassemble_at_address and states it works on any file (not limited to PE/ELF). However, it does not offer exclusions or alternative scenarios.

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