Sb3 Vm Threads

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Inspector' implies a read-only operation, and 'live' suggests current-state observation, but the parenthetical '(proxied)' is unexplained and could confuse an agent about the data source. It provides some behavioral context but not rich detail.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that packs the resource and key attributes into twelve words. No filler or redundant content appears; the '(proxied)' note is the only minor opaque addition.

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?

With zero parameters and an output schema available, the description covers the essential return dimensions (target, clone flag, hat, stack, status). It lacks explicit usage context relative to the many VM siblings, but for a simple inspector with an output schema, it is nearly complete.

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 accepts zero parameters, so there is no parameter documentation burden. The description need not add semantics beyond the already complete empty 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 identifies the tool as a 'Live thread inspector' and enumerates the exposed attributes (target, clone flag, hat, stack, status), which specifies the resource and distinguishes it from sibling tools like sb3_vm_state or sb3_vm_clones. It is a noun phrase rather than a verb, but 'inspector' clearly conveys the action of inspecting threads.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as sb3_vm_state or sb3_vm_clones. The description does not include context, exclusions, or mention of any sibling tool.

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