pyocd_elf_lookup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It implies a read operation but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., symbol not found), return format, or any side effects. The description is too minimal to provide adequate 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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. It clearly states the action and the parameter usage.

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 has a single parameter and an output schema (not shown), but the description lacks details like prerequisite session, error handling, or the fact that it returns an address. For a simple tool it is minimally adequate but not complete.

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% since the only parameter 'name' has a description in the schema. The description repeats 'by name' but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 looks up a symbol's address by name, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like pyocd_elf_symbols (which lists symbols) or pyocd_read_symbol, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., pyocd_read_symbol for reading a symbol's value, pyocd_elf_symbols for listing all symbols). The description does not mention prerequisites like an active session.

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