dbgprobe.mem.write

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose potential side effects, authorization needs, or failure modes. For a write operation, it is critical to know if it can crash the target or require specific permissions.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then data format details. No waste, efficient and clear.

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, but description does not mention return value or success indication. Missing context about preconditions (active session) and failure conditions (invalid address or session). Incomplete for a write tool.

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 80% (session_id missing description). The description adds value by clarifying that 'u32' format expects an array of little-endian 32-bit words, which is not fully captured in the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 the tool writes data to target memory and specifies the supported data formats (hex, base64, u32). It distinguishes from sibling dbgprobe.mem.read by verb 'Write' and resource 'target memory'.

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 vs alternatives like dbgprobe.flash or dbgprobe.erase. The sibling list includes related write operations but the description does not differentiate them.

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