List CDP debugging targets

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read-only enumeration via 'List' and names what is enumerated, but says nothing about permissions, whether the client must be running, freshness, or invocation cost.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The verb and resource come first and the parenthetical adds precision without padding.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should hint at the return shape (target identifiers usable by the other CDP tools). It names the target categories but not how results are keyed or consumed, leaving a gap for a discovery tool with several dependent siblings.

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 to document beyond the empty schema. Baseline 4 applies; no additional parameter meaning is needed or missing.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus a specific resource (CDP debugging targets) with a parenthetical enumerating the target kinds. An agent understands exactly what it returns. It does not distinguish itself from the CDP siblings (console_start, screenshot), so it falls short of a 5.

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?

No explicit when-to-use framing, but listing active targets implies a discovery step before attaching to a target via lol_cdp_console_start, lol_cdp_screenshot, or lol_eval. That implication is left for the agent to infer rather than stated.

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