gdb_context

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Return' indicating a read operation, but does not disclose any side effects, required program state (e.g., must be paused), performance implications, or whether the function alters state.

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 that front-loads the action ('Return') and lists the returned items efficiently. However, it omits parameter details, keeping it concise but slightly incomplete.

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 presence of an output schema (context indicates 'has output schema: true'), the description does not need to detail return values but should explain the depth parameter. It lists the returned items but misses parameter semantics, making it adequate but not 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 input schema has one parameter 'depth' with a default of 20, but the description fails to explain its meaning or effect. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate but does not.

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 specifies a clear verb 'Return' and lists multiple specific resources (registers, instruction, disassembly, etc.). This distinguishes it from siblings like gdb_register or gdb_memory which return single aspects.

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?

The description implies use for getting a comprehensive debug context snapshot but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools like gdb_register or gdb_memory. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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