debuggee_activity

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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds the bounded window aspect, but does not disclose return format, blocking behavior, or whether activity accumulation is reset. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentence of 8 words, conveying the core purpose with no unnecessary text. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description should clarify what 'activity' means and what is returned. Without an output schema, the return value is opaque. The description is too brief to be fully complete.

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 description does not explain the window_ms parameter or its effect. The schema has no description for the parameter, so the agent must infer meaning from the parameter name alone. A description of how to choose the window size would be beneficial.

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 the verb 'Observe' and resource 'adapter-owned debuggee activity', clearly indicating it monitors debuggee activity. The phrase 'during one bounded window' distinguishes it from continuous monitoring tools like get_output or get_trace_delta, but the exact nature of 'activity' is vague.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus the numerous sibling tools (e.g., get_output, get_trace_delta, run_runtime_smoke_*). It does not mention prerequisites or alternatives.

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