keil_get_pc

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does disclose the key precondition that the target must be halted. It omits what happens when the target is running (error vs. stale value) and any indication of side effects or re-read semantics beyond that single constraint.

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?

One short sentence with no filler, and the precondition is placed compactly at the end. It is appropriately sized for a trivial getter, though the terse phrasing means the state requirement is easy to skim past.

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?

With no parameters and an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, so the remaining gap is small. Still, for a debug-context getter among many lookalike siblings, it should clarify the halted-target failure mode and its relationship to keil_get_registers.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Schema coverage is 100% and the empty object leaves no ambiguity.

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 ('Read the actual program counter') with a clear scope, so an agent knows exactly what is returned. It does not differentiate from siblings like keil_get_registers, which plausibly also returns the PC, so it stops short of a 5.

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 phrase 'from a halted target' implicitly gives a prerequisite (target must be halted) and thus a when-not condition. However, it names no alternative for the running case and does not say whether to prefer keil_get_registers for bulk register reads.

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