dbgprobe.connect

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

Discloses that the target is halted after connecting, which is a key behavioral trait. Mentions return values (session_id and resolved configuration). No annotations provided, so description carries the burden; it could mention behavior on failure or disconnection, but overall sufficiently transparent.

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?

Extremely concise, two sentences in the first paragraph covering purpose and return value. Second paragraph provides targeted usage guidance. No redundant information, every sentence serves a purpose.

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 complexity (5 parameters, no output schema but describes return), the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, what the agent should expect, and how it relates to sibling tools. No gaps left for an agent to misinterpret.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters. Description adds extra context by clarifying that 'device' refers to the target chip, not the probe, and mentions environment variable defaults. This adds meaning beyond the 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?

Clearly states 'Establish a debug probe session' with specific verb and resource. Differentiates from siblings by pointing to dbgprobe.elf.attach for symbol-aware debugging and dbgprobe.svd.attach for register-level access, as well as dbgprobe.go for resuming execution.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool (to connect and halt) and when to use alternatives (dbgprobe.go to resume, dbgprobe.elf.attach for symbols, dbgprobe.svd.attach for peripherals). Also clarifies that after connecting, the target is halted.

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