analyze_macho_objc_deep

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions fallback behavior but does not disclose prerequisites, potential failures if class-dump is unavailable, or whether the tool is read-only. It lacks detail on side effects or dependencies.

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: two sentences covering the core function and the argument. Every word is necessary 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?

Given the tool's complexity (deep ObjC analysis) and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the output contains, how to interpret results, or the meaning of 'deep'. For a nuanced tool, more details are expected.

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?

The description adds 'Path to a Mach-O binary' for the path parameter, providing context beyond the schema's type and title. However, the schema already specifies it as a string with title 'Path', so the added value is marginal. With 0% schema description coverage, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 it performs a deep Objective-C class dump, specifying the method (class-dump with fallback to nm+strings). This distinguishes it from the sibling analyze_macho_objc (likely a basic analysis) and other related tools.

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 for deep ObjC analysis but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives like analyze_macho_objc for simpler needs.

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