Restart debuggee

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior, but the description adds substantial detail: it kills the debuggee, disconnects/reconnects CDP, reapplies breakpoints, and preserves both sessionId and the MCP connection. This goes well beyond the annotation and gives the agent a precise mental model of 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?

Two concise sentences capture all essential behavior without repetition or filler. The mode-specific breakdown is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 destructive restart operation, the description fully covers both launch and attach paths, explains reapply behavior, and clarifies what persists. No output schema is present, but the description provides the critical state-preservation context needed to call the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents sessionId and notes when it is required. The description's mention that sessionId is unchanged is useful state information, but it does not add meaning to the parameter itself beyond what the schema 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 identifies the operation as restarting the debuggee and explicitly breaks down what happens in launch mode versus attach mode. This distinguishes it from sibling commands like debug_launch, debug_attach, and debug_disconnect because it names concrete sub-actions.

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 does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the 'For launch:' and 'For attach:' structure gives clear contextual guidance. The statement that sessionId is unchanged and the MCP connection stays up also helps differentiate this from a full disconnect/relaunch flow.

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