diagnose_low_utilization

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

No annotations provided. The description indicates a read-only root cause analysis via '[READ][RCA]', but does not disclose default behavior when target is omitted or output format. It carries the burden well but leaves gaps.

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, front-loads the purpose with brackets, and every sentence serves a purpose with no 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?

The tool has one optional param and no output schema. The description explains what it does but omits details on return values. Given simplicity, it is adequate but not 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?

Schema has 0% description coverage. The description adds value by explaining the target parameter as 'Inference target name from config; omit for the default', which is not obvious from the schema alone.

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 specifies the verb 'explain' and the resource 'under-used GPU' with concrete causes (batching/idle/overprovision). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'gpu_utilization' (raw metrics) and 'diagnose_latency_spike'.

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 usage when GPU is under-used and mentions optional target, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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