get_scope_variables

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions retrieving variables but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or that the session must be paused (only indicated in schema). No mention of return format or read-only nature limits transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence provides value. No redundant or extraneous information.

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 complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description lacks return format details (e.g., list of variable name-value pairs). It also does not clarify that the tool is non-destructive. While adequate for basic understanding, gaps remain for complete autonomy.

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% and already documents each parameter. The description only reinforces scope types (local, closure, global) already implied by scope_index. No additional meaning or constraints are added beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'Retrieves' and resource 'all variables in a specific scope', and explicitly mentions local, closure, and global variables, making the purpose clear and distinct from sibling tools like 'evaluate_expression' or 'set_variable_value'.

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 states 'Use this to see all local variables, closure variables, or global variables', providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it, which would improve differentiation from siblings.

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