dbgprobe.elf.attach

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

No annotations exist, so description carries burden. It mentions re-attaching replaces previous ELF, a key behavior, but lacks details on side effects, permission requirements, or state changes beyond that.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Each sentence adds unique value with no redundancy.

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?

No output schema, and description omits error conditions, return values, prerequisites (e.g., session must exist), and edge cases like invalid ELF files.

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 description coverage is 50% with only 'path' having a minimal description. The tool description adds no additional meaning to parameters beyond what schema provides, leaving 'session_id' undocumented.

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?

Description clearly states it parses an ELF file and attaches to a session, enabling symbol-based debugging. It distinguishes from siblings like dbgprobe.elf.info or dbgprobe.elf.lookup by focusing on attachment.

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 implies usage before setting breakpoints or requiring symbol resolution, but does not explicitly state when to avoid it (e.g., if already attached) or provide alternatives.

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