写入寄存器

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

Annotations already indicate destructive nature (destructiveHint: true). The description adds context with a warning that the operation may affect program execution state, which is helpful beyond 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 short and includes a warning. However, it repeats parameter names in a list that largely mirrors the schema, which could be consolidated.

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 write tool with no output schema, the description covers the core function and warns of side effects. It does not specify allowed value ranges or return behavior, but these are less critical.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing concrete examples for register (r0, pc, sp) and value (0x1000, 42), making the parameters clearer.

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 explicitly states the tool modifies a specified register value, using a specific verb ('修改') and resource ('寄存器的值'). It is distinct from sibling tools like gdb_read_registers or gdb_list_registers.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to modify registers vs other debugging actions. The warning about affecting program state implies caution but does not provide selection criteria.

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