pyocd_rtt_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It reveals that the tool searches RAM, starts RTT, and returns channel info. It also states a precondition (target halted or RTT initialized). However, it could mention side effects such as modifying target state (starting RTT) or potential impacts on further RTT operations.

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 consists of two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by key details. Every sentence provides essential information with no redundancy.

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 tool complexity (starting RTT, searching memory), the description covers the main functionality, precondition, and outputs. With an output schema present, return values need not be detailed. It lacks details about error conditions or search behavior but is largely 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%, so parameters are already documented. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which is adequate. A score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not compensate for low coverage, but coverage is high.

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 starts RTT and discovers channels, distinguishing it from siblings like pyocd_rtt_read (reading) and pyocd_rtt_write (writing). It specifies the action of searching for the SEGGER RTT control block and returning channel names/sizes, making the purpose 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?

The description provides a precondition ('Target must be halted or have RTT initialized'), guiding the agent on when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly compare to alternatives, but the sibling tools (e.g., pyocd_rtt_read) have distinct purposes, so context is implied.

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