insert_watchpoint

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explains the pause behavior and prerequisite, but omits important details such as whether watchpoints persist across sessions, limits on number of watchpoints, performance impact, or how to remove them. The behavioral disclosure is incomplete.

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 (3 sentences), front-loaded with the action, and every sentence is meaningful. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core functionality and prerequisite but lacks details on errors, scope, or lifecycle. It is minimally adequate for a simple tool but could be more complete.

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 100%, and each parameter has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies. No additional semantic value from the description.

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 action ('Set a watchpoint on a variable') and the effect ('Execution will pause when the variable's value changes'). It distinguishes from siblings like breakpoints by focusing on variable changes, and includes a prerequisite ('Must have an active debug session').

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 when needing to monitor variable changes during debugging, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like breakpoints or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The prerequisite is stated but no further context on tool selection.

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