DebugGetMemorySizes

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the safety burden itself by tagging the tool [read-only] and [debug] and stating the state precondition (stopped debuggee) plus the operational constraint (not usable in batch mode). It stops short of saying what happens when the precondition is unmet (error vs. empty result) or how expensive the call is.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the read-only and debug tags lead, then the purpose, then the two constraints. Slight redundancy between the tags and the terse prose keeps it from a 5.

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 diagnostic getter with no output schema, the description never indicates what the returned memory figures look like (which memory categories, units, or shape). Combined with no guidance relative to the snapshot tools, an agent can invoke it but cannot anticipate the result.

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 100% and both parameters are documented in-schema, including the enum for detail with its three levels. The description adds nothing about state_handle or detail, 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?

The description conveys the resource precisely: memory consumption of the currently stopped debuggee. There is no explicit verb ("Memory the stopped debuggee uses" is a noun phrase), and it does not distinguish itself from sibling memory tools such as DebugCreateMemorySnapshot, MemorySnapshotGet, or MemorySnapshotList.

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?

"Needs a stopped debuggee" and "Runs outside batch mode" are concrete preconditions that tell the agent when the call is valid. It does not, however, say when to prefer this over the snapshot siblings (MemorySnapshotList / DebugCreateMemorySnapshot), which is the main remaining ambiguity.

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