baseaddr.reasons

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, requires specific permissions, or has side effects. The brief description adds no behavioral context beyond the name.

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 very short (4 words), but it is appropriately minimal given the tool's narrow purpose. However, it could benefit from a one-sentence expansion to improve clarity without becoming verbose.

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 output schema and two unannotated parameters, the description is insufficient. It does not specify return format, error conditions, or context (e.g., whether this shows reasons for a single detection or multiple). The sibling context shows many analysis tools, but this one lacks the detail needed for effective use.

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 does not explain what session_id or base_address represent, their expected formats, or relationship. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what's in the bare schema.

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 the tool retrieves base-address detection reasons, which is a specific action. However, it doesn't elaborate on what constitutes a detection reason (e.g., pattern matching, heuristics), leaving some ambiguity. It distinguishes from siblings like baseaddr.detect and baseaddr.abort through name alone.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like baseaddr.detect. The description provides no context about prerequisites, typical scenarios, or relationship to other base-address tools.

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