binary.functions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'List functions with pagination', omitting key details such as whether results are sorted, the default pagination behavior, error handling, or the format of the returned data.

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 extremely short (one phrase), which is concise but lacks substance. It earns a baseline 'adequate' score because it is not verbose, but it does not provide enough value for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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's complexity (functions in a binary analysis context), no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not specify return structure, pagination details, or how it relates to other function-listing tools.

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 input schema has 3 parameters (limit, offset, session_id) with 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'pagination' but does not explain how limit/offset work or what session_id represents. The schema alone is insufficient, and the description adds negligible meaning.

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?

Description states 'List functions with pagination', clearly specifying the action (List) and resource (functions). It is specific enough to convey the core purpose, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like binary.functions_at or binary.get_function_disassembly_at.

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 (e.g., binary.functions_at, binary.symbols, or search functions). The description offers no context about prerequisites, scope, or appropriate scenarios.

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