List CDP debugging targets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint, so the 'Safe and read-only' line is largely redundant. The real added value is the prerequisite disclosure: the League client must be running with remote debugging enabled via Pengu Loader, plus the note that other LCU REST/event/workflow tools work without it.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then behavior and prerequisite. Every sentence carries information, though 'Safe and read-only' duplicates annotation data and could be trimmed.

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?

With no output schema, the description conveys what is returned (the list of targets and their IDs) and the gating prerequisite. No parameter docs are needed. Minor gaps remain around pagination/format of the target list, but nothing blocks correct 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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly presents this as a no-argument discovery tool.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Discover and list all active CDP debugging targets') and enumerates the target kinds (pages, modals, worker contexts) exposed by the League Client. It also differentiates from siblings by naming the downstream tools (lol_cdp_screenshot, console/network tailing) it feeds.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it: to inspect renderer contexts and discover target IDs before targeted screenshots or console/network tailing. It does not state when not to use it (e.g., for untargeted CDP operations), but the downstream routing is clear.

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