mem_diff

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only mentions output format. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, whether snapshots must exist in memory, what happens on mismatch, or any side effects.

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, highly concise and front-loaded. However, it omits necessary details, so while efficient, it sacrifices completeness.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, but has an output schema. The description lacks preconditions, return format (though output schema may cover it), and behavioral context, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description does not explain the meaning of 'name1', 'name2', or 'include_raw'. Only the tool's purpose implies name1/name2 are snapshot identifiers, but no details on format or constraints.

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: '比较两个内存快照' (compare two memory snapshots) and specifies the output fields (offset/old/new/u32/ascii). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'mem_snapshot' (which creates snapshots) and 'heap_query_delta' (heap-specific).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'heap_query_delta' or when not to use it. No prerequisites or context for when comparisons are valid.

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