dbgprobe.breakpoint.list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. However, it only states 'List all active breakpoints' and does not mention any side effects, permission requirements, or whether the list is read-only. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the obvious.

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, efficient sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately front-loaded and conveys the essential purpose without any elaboration, which is suitable for a simple list operation.

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 tool's simplicity (one param, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. However, it could be improved by mentioning that the session must be active or that the list reflects current breakpoints set via dbgprobe.breakpoint.set. Without that, the agent may lack sufficient context.

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 and no elaboration in the description, the parameter 'session_id' is left without any added meaning or constraints. The description does not explain what constitutes a valid session_id (e.g., from dbgprobe.connect or dbgprobe.connections.list), which is critical for correct usage.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'active breakpoints for a session'. It distinguishes this tool from its siblings (e.g., dbgprobe.breakpoint.set, dbgprobe.breakpoint.clear) by specifying the action of listing, which is unique among breakpoint operations.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to list breakpoints vs. setting or clearing them. It also lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., needing an active session) or scenarios where it should not be used.

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