start_binary

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

The description only mentions that it starts a session and returns an ID, but omits critical behavioral details such as whether the binary can be remote, what happens on failure, or if the session persists. No annotations provided to supplement.

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 very short and to the point, but it sacrifices detail. It is not verbose, but the lack of structure and missing essential information makes it merely adequate.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain the tool's behavior, parameter roles, or return value semantics, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use it correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it provides no information about any of the 7 parameters. It only implies 'binary_path' is the target binary, leaving all other parameters (args, cwd, load_init, etc.) unexplained.

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 it starts a new gdb session for a binary and returns the session id. The verb 'start' and resource 'gdb session' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'attach_to_pid' which targets existing processes.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, limitations, or when to prefer other tools like 'attach_to_pid' or 'batch_commands'.

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