get_stack_trace

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Get stack trace' without mentioning whether it's read-only, what it returns, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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 extremely concise but at the expense of completeness. 'Get stack trace' is under-specified, not efficiently concise.

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 the complexity of debugging tools and absence of output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits return value structure, preconditions, and behavioral nuances.

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 coverage is 50% (includeInternals has a description, sessionId does not). The description adds no value beyond the schema; it doesn't explain sessionId or clarify parameter usage. With low coverage, the description should compensate but fails to.

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 'Get stack trace' clearly states the verb and resource, making the action understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_local_variables or get_scopes by its specific focus on stack traces, but lacks detail on scope or format.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_scopes or get_variables. The description is too terse to help an agent decide contextually.

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