var_view

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It states the precondition (halted) and implies a read-only operation (viewing). However, it does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness, mention permissions, or describe performance implications. Adequate but not rich.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a line detailing capabilities, a precondition, and clearly labeled Args/Returns sections. Front-loads essential information without extraneous content.

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 that an output schema exists (mentioned but not shown), the description adequately summarizes returns ('Formatted variable view showing all fields and values'). It covers the main usage scenario and precondition. Could add error cases, but overall it is sufficient for a view 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?

The schema has 0% coverage, but the description compensates with concrete examples (e.g., 'myStruct', 'array[0]', 'pTask->state', '%SpotLight'), adding meaningful context beyond the schema's type string.

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 the tool's function: viewing a C/C++ variable, structure, array, or expression with full expansion. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling read_variable by stating 'Much more detailed than read_variable', making its specific purpose unambiguous.

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 a key precondition: 'The target must be halted.' It also hints at when to use this over read_variable (for detailed expansion). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention other alternatives like evaluate or var_set, so guidance is partial.

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