vscode_add_breakpoint

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent, but the description adds nothing: it doesn't say whether breakpoints persist across sessions, whether re-adding the same line is harmless, or that a debug session must be running. With annotations present the bar is lower, yet the description contributes no behavioral context at all.

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 compact sentence with no filler and the optional aspect front-loaded. It is efficient, though borderline under-specified rather than maximally informative.

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?

For a state-mutating debug tool with no output schema, the description omits the debug-session prerequisite, where the breakpoint attaches, and any indication of success/failure. An agent could not confidently invoke this without inferring context from outside the definition.

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 coverage is 67%: 'file' and 'line' are documented in the schema, while 'condition' has no schema description. The description's 'optionally conditional' partially compensates by telling the agent what the parameter is for, but it gives no expression syntax or scope for the condition.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a breakpoint') plus a scope modifier ('optionally conditional'). No sibling performs this action, so differentiation is unnecessary, but the description stops short of saying where the breakpoint lands or its lifecycle.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites. Critically, it never states that an active debug session is required, or how this relates to vscode_debug_state — the one sibling an agent would plausibly pair with it.

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