Get Function Xrefs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses almost nothing: not the return shape (call sites, addresses, containing functions), not whether analysis must be complete first (see analysis_status), and not any failure mode for unknown functions or binaries.

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?

A single short sentence with no waste and the key concept front-loaded, but the brevity is under-specification rather than efficiency — it omits everything an agent needs to call the tool correctly.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description should explain input formats and return content. Instead it provides one sentence, leaving the caller to guess both parameter conventions and what the response contains.

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?

Both parameters have 0% schema description coverage. The description implies 'function' is the function whose callers are wanted, but never clarifies whether it is a name, address, or ID, and 'binary' is completely unexplained (path, name, or handle). With low coverage the description must compensate and does not.

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 and resource in concrete terms: view the callers of a function (who called this function). An agent understands the operation, but the description never distinguishes it from the sibling tools get_xrefs_to and get_xrefs_from, which appear to cover the same ground.

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 parenthetical '(who called this function)' implies the direction of the query (incoming references), which implicitly separates it from get_xrefs_from. However, no alternative is named and there is no guidance on when to prefer this over get_xrefs_to.

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