debug_get_output

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

The description discloses the key delta behavior ('since last call') and specifies the content (stdout/stderr), which is meaningful beyond the basic name. However, with no annotations provided, it leaves out other behavioral traits such as whether the output buffer is consumed/cleared, whether the call blocks or returns immediately, and what happens when there is no new output. Some transparency, but not complete.

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?

One short sentence that front-loads the verb, target resource, and the crucial 'since last call' qualifier. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or redundancy.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description captures the essential semantics: what is retrieved and the stateful delta condition. It doesn't describe the return format or handling of empty output, but those are minor for this straightforward getter. The lack of annotations is partially compensated by the clearly stated behavior.

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 already documents session_id with a clear description ('Debug session ID') and 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or constraints to the parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 is a specific verb+resource combination: 'Get debuggee output (stdout/stderr) since last call.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from the many other debug_get_* siblings by naming the exact resource (stdout/stderr) and the temporal qualifier. No ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 the usage pattern: call this after launching or continuing the debuggee to retrieve new output since the last invocation. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, no sibling serves the same purpose, so the context is clear enough. The 'since last call' qualifier provides an important condition that shapes when to use it.

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