arthas_profiler

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only mentions start/stop actions and CPU/memory events. It does not explain side effects, required permissions, or nuances like the async nature. Critical behavioral information is missing, making it insufficient for safe invocation.

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, making it concise but overly terse. It lacks structure and fails to cover multiple actions and events. While every word is used, it sacrifices informative completeness for brevity, resulting in a minimally adequate but not well-structured description.

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 five parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, this description is incomplete. It does not mention all valid actions or event types, nor does it clarify parameter interactions (e.g., duration vs timeout). An agent would lack essential context for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for each parameter, meeting the baseline. The overall description adds no additional meaning beyond 'start/stop async profiler,' which does not enhance understanding of individual parameters. The descriptions in the schema are generic (e.g., 'Event type'), so the tool description does not compensate.

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 the tool start/stops an async profiler, specifying CPU or memory profiling. While distinct from siblings, it omits other event types (lock, wall) and actions (status, list, etc.), making it slightly imprecise. It clearly identifies the tool's purpose but covers only a subset of capabilities.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or comparison to other arthas tools. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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