value.stack

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'Get stack contents' but does not explain what 'at/after' means, whether the tool is read-only, what happens with invalid addresses, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a safe or correct invocation.

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 short sentence, which is efficient but comes at the cost of clarity. Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, no schema descriptions), it is under-specified and not front-loaded with critical operational details.

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 6 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly inadequate. It does not explain what the tool returns, how parameters interact, or any constraints, making it nearly impossible for an agent to use correctly without external knowledge.

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% and the description adds no parameter information beyond the names. The description mentions 'at/after an address', hinting at the 'address' and 'after' parameters, but does not explain 'size', 'stack_offset', 'function_start', or 'session_id'. The agent must guess their roles.

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 clearly states the tool gets stack contents at/after an address, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like value.reg (registers) and memory.read (arbitrary memory).

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 such as memory.read or value.reg. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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