read_memory

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full behavioral burden. It states output format (hex+ASCII dump), required paused state, and address validity constraint. Could be improved by mentioning error behavior for invalid addresses, but sufficiently transparent.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. First sentence states purpose, second adds constraints and reference. Every word earns its place.

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?

No output schema, but description specifies return format. References sibling for valid ranges. Adequate for a read tool with 3 parameters; could mention error handling but not essential.

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 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. Description adds context about address validity and return format, but mostly duplicates schema information. Baseline 3 with slight extra value.

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?

Description starts with specific verb and resource: 'Read raw bytes from the debuggee's virtual address space.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like write_memory, search_memory, and get_memory_map.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use: 'Address must be in the debuggee's mapped memory' with a reference to sibling get_memory_map, and a prerequisite: 'REQUIRES: session must be paused.'

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