arthas_memory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'Get detailed memory information,' implying a read operation, but does not confirm read-only nature, potential side effects, or any authorization requirements. The minimal description leaves agents without critical behavioral context.

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 short sentence, which is concise and to the point. It avoids unnecessary words or repetition. However, it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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 lack of output schema and the presence of many similar sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not specify what kind of memory information is returned (e.g., heap, non-heap, memory pools) or how the data is structured. This leaves agents uncertain about the tool's output and its fit for the task.

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 has one parameter (timeout) with full description, so the schema already covers its meaning. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as there is no extra value from the description.

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 states 'Get detailed memory information,' which clearly indicates it retrieves memory data. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like arthas_jvm or arthas_heapdump, which may also provide memory details. It is adequate but lacks specificity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not explain how it differs from arthas_jvm or arthas_heapdump, nor does it mention prerequisites or context (e.g., for debugging memory leaks). This lack of usage direction limits its helpfulness.

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