edb_get_registers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns a JSON string with hex values, which is not in annotations. However, it does not disclose performance implications or other behavioral traits. Since annotations cover safety, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence states the main purpose; the second provides return type information. No unnecessary words.

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 no parameters, rich annotations, and an output schema present, the description adequately explains the tool's behavior. It mentions the return format, which is helpful. Almost fully complete for a simple getter.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description cannot add value beyond the schema. Per the guidelines, 0 parameters means baseline 4. No additional meaning needed.

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 explicitly states it gets all CPU register values as JSON, listing specific register types. This clearly distinguishes it from related tools like edb_get_register (single register) or edb_get_eflags (flags only). The verb 'Get' and resource 'all CPU register values' are precise.

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?

The description implies usage when all register values are needed but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., edb_get_register, edb_get_simd_state). There are no when-not or exclusion criteria mentioned.

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