AmdpDebugGetTable

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose two genuinely non-obvious traits: a hard 100-row cap (truncation) and that it runs only outside batch mode. It still omits permission requirements and what happens if invoked without an active stop, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, with bracketed tags signaling read-only and debug category before the core content. The telegraphic phrasing ('through a SELECT over it') is slightly compressed, but no sentence is wasted.

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?

For a read-only debug inspection tool with no output schema and a fully documented schema, the description covers what it returns (rows, bounded at 100, verbosity controllable via detail) and where it may run. Missing only edge-case behavior, which is minor at this complexity.

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%, so all four parameters are already documented, including the detail enum. The description only adds that 'query' is an optional SELECT applied over the table variable instead of a plain row dump; it says nothing about 'variable' or 'state_handle' beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: it reads rows of a table variable at an AMDP debug stop, with an optional SELECT path. The scope ('at the AMDP stop', 'up to 100') separates it from GetTableContents and GetTable, though it never names a sibling explicitly to disambiguate from DebugGetVariables.

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?

'At the AMDP stop' implies the prerequisite (the debugger must already be paused following AmdpDebugStart/AmdpDebugWait), and 'runs outside batch mode' hints at the batch-tool alternative. But there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus AmdpDebugStep, DebugGetVariables, or the batch variants, and no stated failure behavior if not stopped.

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