arch.assemble

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It only says 'assemble,' which implies a transformation, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, modifies state, what happens on failure, or return format. The lack of behavioral context is a critical gap.

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 single-sentence description is under-specified, not concise. It omits critical details and does not earn its place. A concise description should be informative; this is merely a placeholder.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and no behavioral details, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to explain what assembling means, how to use the tool, or what the result is. Users cannot properly invoke this tool based on the description alone.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'instruction text' (asm) and 'selected architecture' (arch_name) but does not mention 'address' or 'session_id.' The description adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter names, leaving two parameters completely unexplained.

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 states 'Assemble instruction text with selected architecture,' which gives a verb and resource but is vague about what 'assemble' means (e.g., produce machine code, validate syntax). It does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'patch.assemble' or 'arch.disasm_bytes,' which also deal with assembly.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., patch.assemble for patching, arch.disasm_bytes for disassembly). There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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