value.reg

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 tool is read-only, requires specific permissions, mutates state, or what happens if parameters are invalid. The 'at/after an address' phrase is ambiguous without clarifying behavior when after is true or false.

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 concise at 6 words, front-loading the verb and resource. However, it under-specifies meaning, which is not ideal conciseness but rather lacking necessary detail.

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 5 parameters (4 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return format, error conditions, or distinguish between 'at' vs 'after' semantics. Compared to similar binary analysis tools, more context is needed.

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 description must compensate for all 5 parameters. The description only references 'register' and 'address' implicitly, ignoring session_id, function_start, and after. It adds no meaning beyond what the parameter names suggest.

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 'Get register value at/after an address' specifies the verb (Get) and resource (register value at/after address), but is vague about what 'at/after an address' means in the context of binary analysis. Among siblings like value.possible, value.stack, and value.flags_at, its purpose is somewhat distinguishable as register-specific, but not clearly differentiated.

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 value.possible (for possible values) or memory.read (for raw memory). The description does not mention prerequisites like session_id or address context, nor when 'after' should be set.

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