edb_reverse_step

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

Adds context beyond annotations by specifying the requirement for GDB recording and that it steps the program backward. Annotations show it is not read-only and not destructive, which aligns. Could be improved by noting effect on execution state.

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?

Very concise: opens with purpose, then prerequisite, then parameter summary. Every sentence adds value. No redundant information.

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?

Covers the key aspects: what it does, prerequisite, and parameter. Sufficient for a reverse debugging step tool. Could mention that it only works when recording is active, but already stated.

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 description explains the 'count' parameter as the number of reverse steps with a default of 1, adding meaning beyond the schema's description. The schema already defines the default, but the text clarifies the purpose.

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?

Clearly states the tool steps backward in execution for reverse debugging. The verb 'step' and resource 'program execution' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like edb_step_instruction which step forward.

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?

Explicitly mentions the prerequisite of GDB recording being active, which guides when to use. However, it does not directly compare with siblings like edb_reverse_continue or explain when to step vs continue backward.

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