list_functions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the return format (list with name and start address) but does not cover edge cases like empty results or sorting order. The prerequisite is mentioned, which adds some behavioral context.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, includes a returns block, and is front-loaded. Every sentence provides essential information.

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?

For a simple tool with no parameters, the description covers the prerequisite and return format. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return values, but the description still provides key information.

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 tool has no parameters, and the input schema coverage is 100%. With 0 parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter details. It appropriately focuses on the operation.

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 (function symbols in ELF file). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like list_breakpoints, list_devices, list_global_variables.

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 explicitly requires prior invocation of load_elf(), which provides a clear prerequisite. However, it does not mention when not to use or give explicit alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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