backend_debugger_attach

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'attach' without explaining session duration, permissions, or side effects. It also omits that the tool supports Deno and Chrome in addition to Node.js, which is relevant for correct usage.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core action and purpose without filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Despite the concise phrasing, the tool has four parameters and no output schema, yet the description does not explain return values, whether attaching is blocking, or how to detach. For a debugging tool, this leaves significant gaps in understanding expected behavior.

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?

All four parameters have descriptions in the schema, giving a baseline of 3. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics, such as how host/port relate to processId or which runtime requires which parameters, so it neither improves nor degrades the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb 'Attach' with a clear resource ('Node.js process debugger') and purpose ('breakpoint debugging'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like debug_localhost or backend_logs_stream. It is unambiguous and directly states the tool's function.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as debug_localhost or backend_logs_stream. The description implies usage for breakpoint debugging but lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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