analyze_function

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: pseudocode capped at 100 lines, token-saving for include_asm default. Does not mention error handling (e.g., function not found) or whether tool is read-only, though context implies analysis.

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 sentences with no redundant words. First sentence enumerates outputs, second provides usage guidance. Extremely efficient.

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 output schema exists, description need not detail return format. It covers purpose, usage guidance, and output contents sufficiently. No apparent gaps.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds limited extra semantics: explains include_asm default reduces token usage. No further detail beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool performs compact single-function analysis and lists exact outputs (pseudocode, strings, constants, callers, callees, xrefs, comments, basic block summary). It distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning as an alternative to chaining multiple tools.

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 tells when to use ('tell me everything about function X') and when to avoid (instead of chaining decompile + callees + xrefs_to separately). Names specific alternatives. Could mention prerequisites or limitations for very large functions.

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