get_shader_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns shader disassembly, constant buffer values, and resource bindings, providing key behavioral info. However, it does not mention safety, permissions, or side effects, but for a read-like info tool this is adequate.

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 concise, with a one-sentence main purpose followed by a structured Args list. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded, with no redundancy or wasted words.

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 presence of an output schema, the description need not detail return structure, but it lists the return content (disassembly, constant buffer, bindings). It covers inputs and outputs adequately but lacks edge cases, event validity, or why to choose this tool over similar ones. Still, it is reasonably complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must fully explain each parameter. It does so effectively: event_id is described as 'The event ID to inspect the shader at' and stage as 'The shader stage' with an enum listing. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type and required status.

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 gets shader information for a specific stage at a given event, specifying the verb 'Get' and the resource 'shader information'. It distinguishes from siblings like get_pipeline_state by focusing on per-stage shader details at a specific event, making its purpose unique.

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 context but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like get_pipeline_state or when not to use it. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided, though the purpose is clear enough for basic selection.

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