track_chunk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions tracking a 'lifecycle' but does not explain what tracking entails (e.g., whether it records events, requires resources, or is reversible). Output schema exists but is not referenced, and no side effects are noted.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff. Front-loaded with key concept. Could be slightly more informative without adding bulk, but currently efficient.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and two parameters (one undocumented), the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, lifecycle details, or how the tool behaves over time. Sibling tools like 'untrack_chunk' suggest pairing, but no hint is given.

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%, yet the description only partially compensates by linking 'addr' to a chunk address. The 'size' parameter is entirely undocumented, and the description does not clarify how 'header/bin/memory diff lifecycle' relates to the parameters. Baseline for 0% coverage would be 4, but missing explicit parameter meanings reduces score.

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?

Description uses specific verb '追踪' (track) and resource 'chunk地址的header/bin/memory diff生命周期', clearly indicating the tool starts tracking the lifecycle of a chunk's header, bin, and memory diff. This differentiates it from sibling tools like 'untrack_chunk' which stops tracking, and other query tools like 'heap_chunk_bin' that inspect state.

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?

Description implies usage for starting to monitor a chunk's lifecycle, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., mem_diff, untrack_chunk). No contextual triggers or prerequisites are stated, making it average but not misleading.

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