list_watchpoints

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

No annotations are present, and the description provides minimal behavioral insight. It does not disclose requirements (e.g., debugger active), output format, or side effects. For a read operation, more context is expected.

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 concise (one sentence) but lacks structure. It is a minimal statement that could benefit from additional context without losing conciseness.

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 no output schema and only one parameter, the description should provide more context on return format, expected behavior, or examples. It falls short of being complete for effective use by an AI agent.

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 sole parameter 'target' is not explained in the description. With 0% schema coverage, the description adds no value beyond the schema. The meaning of 'target' and its default 'ee' are left ambiguous.

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 clearly states the action (list) and the resource (memory watchpoints in the PCSX2 debugger), distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_watchpoint and remove_watchpoint.

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, such as list_debug_breakpoints or status. No prerequisites or context for effective use.

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