r2_analyze_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool runs aaa analysis, automatically releases resources, supports session_id reuse or lookup by file path, and instructs the agent to close unused sessions. The session lifecycle is slightly ambiguous but not contradictory.

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 trigger information is repeated in the Use-when list and the trigger scene, and the text mixes emoji, bracket labels, Chinese, and English unnecessarily. It could be condensed to a few focused sentences without losing content.

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?

The tool is complex and has no output schema or annotations, yet the description omits what the analysis result looks like and how to choose between providing session_id and letting it resolve by file_path. It does cover path safety, session reuse, and cleanup, making it minimally adequate.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds useful semantics: file_path must be an absolute path, invented paths/results are forbidden, and session_id can be used to reuse an existing session or locate it by file path.

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 identifies a concrete action: running a one-shot radare2 deep analysis (aaa) on a binary file and releasing resources. It also lists applicable domains, though the broad trigger list overlaps with sibling tools such as r2_disassemble and r2_decompile_function.

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 provides explicit trigger scenes and a mandatory-priority rule for binary analysis requests. However, it gives no exclusions or alternatives, and its trigger list is broad enough that an agent cannot tell when to choose r2_disassemble or r2_decompile_function instead.

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