set_breakpoint

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that tracepoints auto-continue and dump variables to a file, but does not discuss permissions, side effects, or what happens on breakpoint hit (pause vs continue).

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 wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded. 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?

Despite full schema coverage, the description lacks guidance on key parameters (condition, maxDumps, hitCondition) and their interactions. It focuses narrowly on dumpFile, leaving the tool's full behavior under-specified.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra semantics by mentioning dumpFile usage, but does not elaborate on other parameters like condition or hitCondition.

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 sets a breakpoint at a specific line, and mentions the tracepoint variant via dumpFile. It is specific but does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like list_breakpoints or remove_breakpoint.

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?

It hints at using dumpFile for tracepoints but provides no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives are mentioned. The usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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