Debug Get Variables

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses one meaningful trait - the tool only applies to a suspended process - but omits what happens when the process is not suspended (error vs empty), that it is a non-mutating read, and whether results are scoped to a selected frame or thread.

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. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of the sibling differentiation and precondition detail noted above.

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?

Output schema covers return values and there are no parameters, so the remaining gaps are behavioral. The description does not say how variables relate to the frame/thread siblings a debugger session would use first, nor what happens outside a suspended state.

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 for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the description adds nothing misleading about inputs.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get current variables') plus a scoping condition ('when process is suspended'). It is clear what it does, but it never distinguishes itself from the closely related debug_get_stack_frames and debug_get_threads siblings, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.

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 phrase 'when process is suspended' implies the prerequisite context for calling it, but there is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of what to do if the process is running, and no routing to the stack-frame or thread siblings that typically precede this call.

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