trace_list

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

No annotations provided; description compensates by clarifying the tool is read-only and non-destructive, and specifies required target state. Could further mention it does not modify trace buffer contents.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences plus parameter/return details. Front-loaded with purpose, no redundant words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers key usage context (halted target) and parameter semantics. Has output schema so return format is not required. Could mention availability prerequisites (e.g., trace must be started), but overall sufficient for a simple display tool.

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 has 0% description coverage; description adds meaning by explaining max_records is 'Maximum number of trace records to display' with default value, significantly improving clarity over raw schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Display the recorded trace buffer contents' with specific details on what is shown (instruction flow, data accesses, timestamps). Distinguishes itself from sibling trace tools like trace_start or trace_clear as a read-only display tool.

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 states prerequisite 'The target must be halted' and notes timestamps are conditional. Lacks explicit comparison to alternatives like trace_data_read or trace_data_write, but provides sufficient context for when to invoke.

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