binary.functions_at

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only says 'List functions at an address.' It does not state whether the tool is read-only or destructive, what the return format looks like, or whether it may throw errors for invalid addresses. The description is too sparse.

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 a single sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded and efficient, but it may be too concise given the lack of detail for the agent.

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 complexity of the binary analysis domain and the large list of sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not clarify the scope of 'at an address' (e.g., single or multiple functions), the return structure, or error conditions. The lack of output schema and parameter documentation compounds the issue.

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%, meaning the schema provides no descriptions for the two parameters ('address' and 'session_id'). The tool's description does not explain the meaning of these parameters, such as what format the address should take or how to obtain a session_id. This is a significant gap.

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 'List functions at an address' clearly states the verb (list) and the resource (functions at an address), but it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'binary.get_function_at', which could be very similar. Without additional context, an agent might confuse the two.

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 like 'binary.get_function_at', 'binary.functions', or 'disasm.function'. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring an open session or valid address format.

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