stacktrace_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully explains key behaviors: async state-machine flattening and hiding of BCL infrastructure frames by default, and the raw option for unmodified frames. It lacks details on error handling or auth, but covers the main behavioral traits.

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 long, with the first stating the core purpose and the second detailing the key behavioral nuance (async flattening and raw option). Every word earns its place.

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?

While the description covers the most important behavioral aspect (async flattening), it does not describe the output structure or format. Given no output schema, the agent might need more context on what a stack frame contains. It is sufficient for a simple retrieval but not fully 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?

All 4 parameters are documented in the schema with descriptions and defaults. The description adds little beyond restating defaults (threadId, raw) and does not elaborate on startFrame or levels meaningfully. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds minimal value.

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 verb (Get) and resource (call stack of a thread), and explains the default flattening behavior. While it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like stack_explore, the purpose is specific and 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 explains when to use the raw parameter but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The usage context is implied but not thorough.

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