debuggerStackTrace

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose side effects and state dependencies. It only says 'retrieves', implying a read operation, but does not specify if a debugger must be attached, whether the tool modifies state, or what happens on failure. Critical behavioral details are absent.

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?

Extremely brief (one sentence), but the sentence essentially restates the tool name. It does not earn its place by adding value; it is under-specified rather than concise. Important context is missing.

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?

Given the tool interacts with a debugger and lacks an output schema and annotations, the description provides almost no context. It fails to explain return format (e.g., list of frames, thread info), prerequisites, or behavior when no debugger is active. Completely inadequate for safe usage.

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 parameter descriptions already present. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate. No parameter details are offered in the description.

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 states the verb 'retrieves' and resource 'debugger stack trace', making the purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling debugger tools like debuggerGoToStack or debuggerVariables, missing an opportunity to clarify the exact output (list of frames).

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., debuggerGoToStack). No prerequisites (requires an active debugger session) or context for invocation are mentioned. The description offers no usage scenario.

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