disassemble

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

No annotations are provided (e.g., readOnlyHint), and the description only states the basic action. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, modifies state, or has side effects. Given no annotations, the description should compensate but fails to provide behavioral context.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. It uses backticks for parameters, making it easy to parse. Every word is necessary and contributes to understanding.

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?

While the tool has a simple signature and an output schema exists, the description lacks behavioral transparency and usage guidance. For a tool with no annotations, more behavioral context (e.g., safety, output format) would be needed for completeness.

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 add meaning. It explains 'count' as number of instructions and 'address' as memory location, but does not mention 'session_id' or its purpose. This partial explanation provides some value but is incomplete.

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 verb 'disassemble' and the resource 'instructions at address from live memory', with parameters 'count' and 'address' explicitly mentioned. It distinguishes from sibling tools like read_memory, write_memory, and scan_memory by focusing on instruction disassembly.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The context of a debugger toolset implies usage for instruction-level analysis, but there is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice, nor mention of prerequisites like needing a live session.

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